<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<head>
    <title>THE BEATLES - Reviews</title>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
    <meta name="Author" content="Fernando H. Canto" />
    <meta name="Keywords" content="Beatles, reviews, albums, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Revolver, Sgt Pepper, Abbey Road" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" title="Classic Blue" href="code/classic.css" />
    <link rel="alternate stylesheet" title="Plainish" href="code/plain.css" />
</head>

<body>

<h1>
    THE BEATLES
</h1>

<div class="quote">
    "The who?"<br />

    <img alt="Lennon, Harrison, McCartney and Starr, in their 'self-counscious' period" src="images/beatles.png" />
</div>

<div class="members">
    John Lennon, George Harrison, Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr<br />

    <a href="http://www.southparkstudios.com/games/create.html">South Park Create-A-Character</a>
</div>

<p class="albumList">
  <a href="#me">Please Please Me</a><br />
  <a href="#beatles">With The Beatles</a><br />
  <a href="#night">A Hard Day's Night</a><br />
  <a href="#sale">Beatles For Sale</a><br />
  <a href="#help">Help!</a><br />
  <a href="#soul">Rubber Soul</a><br />
  <a href="#revolver">Revolver</a><br />
  <a href="#band">Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</a><br />
  <a href="#tour">Magical Mystery Tour</a><br />
  <a href="#thebeatles">The Beatles</a><br />
  <a href="#road">Abbey Road</a><br />
  <a href="#be">Let It Be</a><br />
  <a href="#masters1">Past Masters, vol 1</a><br />
  <a href="#masters2">Past Masters, vol 2</a><br />
</p>

<p>Reviewing the Beatles might be the most unnecessary thing one can do on the Internet these days. But who cares? I'm doing it to make this site more complete, anyway. Who cares if a million people already did it before me? <em>I</em> certainly don't. I'm just going to talk about them and that's it. I won't try to make smartarse reviews or try "funny" ways of reviewing their albums. There's nothing about the Beatles that makes them deserve any kind of special treatment. To me, they're a band like any other, you know. An excellent, important and significant band, but many others are. I mean, there are lots of people who would agree with me if I said Frank Zappa is every bit as important, if not more, than the Beatles, and lots of people who would agree if I said the same about Bob Dylan. And many wouldn't mind if I said I like Pink Floyd, or Sigur R&oacute;s, more than the Beatles. If anyone thinks that's some sort of blasphemy, he needs to grow up. So, dive in headfirst and enjoy.</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail your ideas</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="me">Please Please Me (1963)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Twist And Shout</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>I Saw Her Standing There <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Misery <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Anna (Go To Him)</li>
  <li>Chains</li>
  <li>Boys</li>
  <li>Ask Me Why</li>
  <li>Please Please Me <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Love Me Do <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>P.S. I Love You</li>
  <li>Baby It's You</li>
  <li>Do You Want To Know A Secret?</li>
  <li>A Taste Of Honey</li>
  <li>There's A Place</li>
  <li><span class="good">Twist And Shout ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>This record certainly marks a time when you could record a full LP in one day. Good times, I guess. Back at that time, the Beatles were just a band that had a well built legacy playing in local bars and whatnot, covering their rock 'n' roll heroes and learning to make music all by themselves, listening to records and figuring it all out by their own. And you have to admit that this LP is really interesting at least in one aspect: it works as a nice snapshot of a band of that kind. It is obvious that they were still "immature" with what concerns music making and that whole business, but from the very beginning, the talent clearly showed through, guided by the blessed hands of George Martin - a genius whose importance can't be diminished at all.</p>

<p>Eight of these tracks are originals, and although they all range from "decent" to "great", you can see that the guys were still worshipping too much their heroes. While they had a style and sound pretty much of their own, pretty much all they did when writing songs was assembling together pieces of tracks they knew: take a guitar part from here, take a little melody from there, an idea from here... and there it goes. But there's nothing really wrong with that: this is not plagiarism, and it only shows that they were still <em>learning</em> the business. And you got to admit this material is <em>good</em> for "immature" artists like them. No matter if they nicked bits and pieces of other songs, they managed to assemble it into a rich, diverse package, and put some true <em>beauty</em> in rock music. See, can you go wrong with songs like the title track and 'Love Me Do'? They're beautiful, enjoyable pieces of work, aren't they? You gotta admire stuff like that, even if you don't like the style.</p>

<p>And, well, the style of music is pretty much what you'd expect for 1963. But one thing that strikes me is that, somehow, their songs do <em>not</em> sound like "bubblegum" to me. Possibly because they were still "learning" in this album, and so they shouldn't be very confident in making music <em>for the masses</em>, as in, to appeal each and every of the screaming little girls out in the world. They are making music for <em>their</em> own sake, and that's why you have things like 'I Saw Her Standing There' - Paul accounts a tale that happened to him in some party, and it's like he was telling his friend, or something. Nope, doesn't taste like bubblegum at all. How is bubblegum music supposed to have the "naughty" bits like 'Please Please Me' and the intro to 'I Saw Her Standing There' - which reportedly is "one, two, three, f...!", you know what I mean. And I'll go ahead and state how moronic those "jokes" are, so yeah, boo-fucking-hoo.</p>

<p>For starters, the eight originals are far more interesting than the covers. Not that the band didn't spend some real effort into making these covers sound good and refreshing, but John and Paul' songwriting is already starting to show something <em>new</em> to the world, so undoubtedly they're more interesting to hear than the covers. 'Anna (Go To Him)', 'Chains' and 'Baby It's You' are fine pieces of pop, not the kind of stuff I'd turn off with disgust, but they're just <em>there</em>. I don't care much about the sluggish "waltz" of 'A Taste Of Honey' (didn't Lennon himself once call this song "A Waste Of Money"? Didn't Lennon hate EVERYTHING?), and 'Boys'... Well, 'Boys' must have only been recorded as some sort of joke. At least it sounds <em>genuinely</em> like that, even though Ringo puts out a pretty good vocal delivery on that one. The song itself is pretty dumb, but heh, they at least make it sound a bit tongue-in-cheek. Or maybe I'm making up stuff.</p>

<p>The last cover is 'Twist And Shout', and not only it's great, but it's the best track on the album. The level of pure entertainment is undeniable, with the way John sings - actually SCREAMS - the melody and the band harmonising the climactic crescendos. That's one Beatles track that people should have, just because it's so fun. But hey, what about the "interesting" originals? Aren't they so much better than the covers? Well, in general, yeah, but none of them manage to pack up so much unadulterated <em>fun</em> as 'Twist And Shout' does. But all of them have at least one interesting hook, or a well written melody, and such. 'I Saw Her Standing There' is their attempt at a "rock 'n' roll" song, and heck, when you have 'Boys' on the same side of the LP, you can't help but think it's God-like - catchy chorus, funny lyrics and all. The rest is all pop music, and some tracks are naturally stronger than others. In the ballad department, for example, 'Misery' stands out as an example of the band delivering their "emotional" content as a joke; it's clear that they thought that song was pretty silly, so they performed it like that. And the result is good, 'cause hey, good humour counts here. The same doesn't happen with the awkward 'Ask Me Why', which is <em>just</em> okay, and 'P.S. I Love You' could have been less sweety sweety. But this is Paul, isn't it? One thing about Paul is that he's almost always at the very extremes; his songs are either <em>extremely</em> syrupy and wannabe happy, or <em>extremely</em> down and sad, or trying <em>extremely</em> hard to the funny, or weird... He rarely wrote songs that went "<em>okay</em>, this is just a normal, everyday song for balanced people with balanced minds". When he <em>did</em> so, though, he was in for a surefire winner.</p>

<p>The more upbeat, lightweight pop material does stand out considerably. 'Love Me Do' is an epochal song, funny, catchy, simple and clever. You <em>really</em> don't need anything more than the 2/4 beat, the harmonica riff and the entangled harmonies of John and Paul, believe me. And the title track is <em>really</em> catchy in its upbeat, energetic and joyful delivery. If you listen to it, you'll probably understand why George Martin told the guys they had "just recorded their first #1 single". Compared to those, 'There's A Place' and 'Do You Want To Know A Secret' don't stand out much, but they're still good, the former with that strange, disimbodied harmonica sound and the latter with George Harrison on the vocals. Just keep in mind that, like this album or not, you'll only find stuff like this in <strong>Please Please Me</strong> and nowhere else. There are better places to go if you want to know why the Beatles are so wildly worshipped, but anyone with the slightest interest in music from this era needs this album. It's, like they say, a "must have", but not for the casual fan. But then again, who knows? If the casual fan likes lighthearted, youthful pop music, this album <em>is</em> recommended. Or would you prefer Westlife?</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - Delightful, though not <em>all</em> of it. This is a <em>different</em> kind of fun, here.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - These guys, so na&iuml;ve and unassuming, are just <em>going</em> to take over your heart sometime.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>10/15</strong></big> - I'm not sure what to say here... not because 6 tracks are covers, but... Well, the guys did have a style of their own, but this material wasn't <em>quite</em> their own, yet.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>10/15</strong></big> - Musical ideas aren't as aboundant as in future releases, but they're present at every spot.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - Um, well, I don't think an album like this has hopes of being 'cohesive'.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/09.png" alt="9" />
</p>

<p>Comments? Ideas? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="beatles">With The Beatles (1963)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>All My Loving</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>It Won't Be Long <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>All I Gotta Do <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">All My Loving ++</span></li>
  <li>Don't Bother Me <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Little Child</li>
  <li>Till There Was You <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Please Mister Postman</li>
  <li>Roll Over Beethoven</li>
  <li>Hold Me Tight</li>
  <li>You Really Got A Hold On Me <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>I Wanna Be Your Man</li>
  <li>Devil In Her Heart</li>
  <li>Not A Second Time</li>
  <li>Money (That's What I Want) <span class="good">+</span></li>
</ol>

<p>On the very surface, there's little or no difference between this and their debut. So, unless you have a more than slight interest on the Beatles, you wouldn't want to have <em>both</em> of them. See, below the surface, the differences between the two albums are quite drastic. They weren't in for jokes anymore. They were already wildly successful and popular, there were expectations and pressures from all sides, and this album is the result of a much more mature pop band. A pop band, still, but a mature band. There are still covers, but the originals are far more accomplished, carefully written and interesting than the previous ones. In short, this is the "sophomore slump" slump -or if you wish, the exception that proves the rule. And <em>here</em> I have to give kudos to the guys. A smaller, weaker band would probably freak out under these conditions. The Beatles, instead, made the best out of it, and if you find this album impressive enough, keep in mind that it's mainly a platform for even bigger successes.</p>

<p>The thing is... This is bubblegum pop music. Not a bad thing per se, but the implication of that is that, like I already said, the Beatles weren't in for fun anymore. They aren't inviting you to <em>their</em> kind of fun - they were already entering the process of "producing" fun for the masses. It's interesting to that the two immesely popular singles from this era, 'She Loves You' and 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand', were written specifically for the markes of, respectively, the UK and the US. Just see the difference between '<em>She</em> Loves <em>You</em>' and '<em>I</em> Wanna Hold <em>Your</em> Hand'. Yes, it's exactly what you're thinking. There's a vital difference between the Beatles making songs for themselves and making songs for all the little hysterical young girls who'd put their Beatles 45's on the turntable and listen all day long, dreaming of their idols. And this album is more 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand' than 'She Loves You'.</p>

<p>But the music itself is worth a lot. The covers here fluctuate between <em>very good</em> and <em>passable</em>. I dunno, it might be just me, but I have little need for renditions of 'Please Mister Postman' and 'Devil In Her Heart', and it really <em>might</em> be just me, but George's rendition of 'Roll Over Beethoven' isn't particularly convincing.Of course it's a great song, but, eh... I mean, the real charm of the Beatles is the originals, after all. The good covers, in my opinion, are the groovy doo wop ballad 'You Really Got A Hold On Me', the nifty - albeit "cutesy" rendition of the ballad 'Till There Was You', and the gritty, funny 'Money'. I really like the latter, not just because John pulls off a really good vocal performance, but those lyrics are made for me. I'm not a greedy person, but "your loving gives me thrills / but your loving don't pay my bills" is something I'd <em>definitely</em> say if I had to. But yes, like I might have implied, I prefer the originals. And, boy, are these originals getting better! Especially in terms of craftsmanship, but also in terms of catchiness. Take 'All My Loving', for instance: it's a catchy, beautiful pop melody, but given a more generic arrangement, it wouldn't be so far ahead of <strong>Please Please Me</strong>. But the arrangement, but with its fast, waltzy beat and endlessly strummed guitar, gives it an unique flair. That's a great accomplishment for Paul, and a good example of what I mean when his songs don't fall on "extremes". A good counter-example is 'Hold Me Tight', which <em>really</em> doesn't offer anything other than an attempt at sounding "cute". No, thanks.</p>

<p>On the other hand, one can't deny the catchiness of John's 'It Won't Be Long' and 'All I Gotta Do', the former opening the album in a burst of upbeat, joyful music which works even better than 'I Saw Her Standing There', and the latter settling things down to a gentle, charming ballad. There's something a bit <em>awkward</em> about 'Not A Second Time', though, but I can't quite tell what it is. Good piano by George Martin, though. George's 'Don't Bother Me' is great, moody and frowny, with a fun jazzy feel and George's complete lack of skill with doubletracking (duly forgiven, of course). And what about 'I Wanna Be Your Man'? This song sounds nowhere close to <em>anything</em> they did to this point, hilariously dumb, simplistic and rocking, with Ringo on the lead vocals. They even gave the song to the Rolling Stones. It's sure is an entertaining song, and it doesn't even matter how out of place it might feel among the other "tame" tunes. The album as a whole is certainly a step-forwards from the debut, but keep in mind that the "fun" is a bit diminished here. This is professional stuff, but hey, when it comes to the Beatles, that's more of an asset than a weakness. So, deal with it.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>10/15</strong></big> - What? Isn't the fun diminished? Yes, but in <em>one</em> aspect.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - The songs are getting better, really.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>11/15</strong></big> - Like I said, the songs are getting better.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>11/15</strong></big> - Better, catchier, more professionaly crafted. Yeah!<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - The covers still get in the way, a little.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/10.png" alt="10" />
</p>

<p>Please Mister <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mailman</a>...</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="night">A Hard Day's Night (1964)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>A Hard Day's Night</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">A Hard Day's Night ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">I Should Have Known Better ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">If I Fell ++</span></li>
  <li>I'm Happy Just To Dance With You</li>
  <li><span class="good">And I Love Her ++</span></li>
  <li>Tell Me Why <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Can't Buy Me Love <span class="bad">&times;</span></li>
  <li>Anytime At All</li>
  <li><span class="good">I'll Cry Instead ++</span></li>
  <li>Things We Said Today <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>When I Get Home</li>
  <li>You Can't Do That</li>
  <li><span class="good">I'll Be Back ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>Well, now, I expect any <em>moron</em> to be able to tell the difference between this album and the previous two releases. One of the differences is pretty obvious, but it's still impressive: there are <em>no</em> covers. Yes: <em>no</em> covers. The album is made up mainly of songs featured in the Beatles' first motion picture, <em>A Hard Day's Night</em>. I haven't seen the movie, but the album? Hoo boy, is it ever an entertaining, insanely effective and memorable pop album. Yes, the concept of "catchiness" is rendered almost obsolete here, as the songs just hit you in the head as they come and refuse to leave your brain. This is what pop music is all about, man: clever, sophisticated and fun.</p>

<p>There are some weak links here. And yes, I'll be the bastard to rant about 'Can't Buy Me Love', even though you can probably yell and shout at my face that I can't give a coherent reason to dislike the song so strongly, but I <em>swear</em> I'm being honest, and it's no question of anti-hype - see how comfortable I am with praising other "classic"Beatles songs here. 'Can't Buy Me Love' just have one of the most moronic melodies - or better, <em>anti-melodies</em> - as well as one of the most mindnumbingly irritating choruses the Beatles ever recorded. Paul just merrily skips along the blues scale on the verses and whine a chorus that sounds like it was written in five seconds - it probably was - and, by golly, even George's solo isn't that catchy. But alas, Paul does redeem himself with 'Things We Said Today', in which he smartly counters the happy, idealistic lyrics with a tense, bitter minor key melody. That <em>is</em> a twist we didn't get to see often at this time, since John hadn't yet developed his apocalyptic sarcasm, so kudos for that song. And there's the bolero 'And I Love Her', of course, covered by millions of artists in hundreds of languages, and which is only <em>one</em> in a string of infinitely covered Paul McCartney songs (see 'Yesterday' and 'Michelle'). Is the guy good or what? Sure he is. The melody is a well deserved classic, and... <em>oh my God are those lyrics dumb</em>. I know it might sound useless to whine about early Beatles lyrics but, forgive me, this is too much. I just find it funny and sad that a praise he can give his lover is "and, if you saw my love, you'd love her too". I mean, wow. Imagine a conversation going like "hey, I met your girl yesterday, and know what? You were right! I love her too now! Isn't it fun? We BOTH love your girlfriend now!" I just kinda don't understand that logic. And okay, let's skip over the abrupt change of subject in the chorus (first "she" and then "you". Hmm...), since a lot of people do that, but the "bright are the stars that shine, dark is the sky" in the final verse is just one step away from "roses are red, violets are blue". Yes, yes, he was young, he had a lot to learn, and in that age, making the words rhyme and fit the metrics were way more important than saying something clever. I understand all of that. I just felt like pointing it out, y'know? And poking some fun at Paul, of course.</p>

<p>All the other songs, in spite of being credited as always to "Lennon/McCartney", are all Lennon's brainchilds. Which is undoubtedly impressive. Not only that, but the majority of those ten tracks are cleverly written and memorable.Not <em>all</em> of them, but that's to be expected. The good tracks are good enough to outweigh the weak ones. The opening trio of tracks is a classic, starting off with a fast, snappy rhythm, unstoppably catchy vocals and the rich sounds of the 12-string Rickenbacker guitars - a much better song than 'Can't Buy Me Love', if you allow me to say it. The second song, 'I Should Have Known Better', is a slower, poppier tune with harmonica playing and an infectious melody, which is only to be expected. On the other hand, 'If I Fell' is one of the band's most sophisticated and intelligently written ballads ever. The finest feature is definitely the harmony between John and Paul. Somehow, they made it sound like there were more voices in the mix. I mean, it <em>does</em> sound like there's a third singer, but there isn't! It's a grandiose composition, and one of my favourite Beatles ballads. Oh, yes, and there's <em>another</em> of my favourite Beatles ballads at the very end of the album, the gorgeous 'I'll Be Back', with more wicked melodies and an intelligent way to create tension, fluctuating between the A major and A minor chords. I really, really, really like that one.</p>

<p>The rest is... well, not exactly consistent. For example, I can't say I'm a fan of the overly sweety-sweet 'Anytime At All'. It isn't a fine example of a bad Beatles song, but it relies on some annoying clich&eacute;s, and pales in comparison to the catchier songs in the album. 'I'm Happy Just To Dance With You' is a bit better, a bit of a throwaway, but George makes a nice, understated delivery, and 'When I Get Home' <em>is</em> a throwaway, damn close to a self-parody. The remaining songs, fortunately, are considerably better. 'You Can't Do That' isn't one of the catchiest songs here, but it does have a cool "Latin blues" rhythm and a funny guitar riff. The harmony laden 'Tell Me Why' is a fun performance, a bit reminescent of the Beach Boys (what with the rhythm and all the harmonies), and I'm crazy for 'I'll Cry Instead', made extra fine with a countryish rhythm and a bitter/angry vocal delivery. What matters is that, overall, the hit/miss ratio of the album, in my opinion, is high. And keeping in mind that the album was an important release for the Beatles, and still one of the most important pop albums of our time, <strong>A Hard Day's Night</strong> deserves a lot of credit. And a reasonably high rating from me. Yeah.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Not exactly ideal, but highly enjoyable.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>12/15</strong></big> - At best, it's exciting and thrilling. At worst, it's 'Can't Buy Me Love'.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>14/15</strong></big> - What do you know, this is the Beatles truly "at it".<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Masterfully written songs, with just a few so-so spots.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - Could have been more even. Could have been <em>less</em> even, too.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/12.png" alt="12" />
</p>

<p>I'm happy just to <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">mail</a> with you!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="sale">Beatles For Sale (1964)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>I'm A Loser</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>No Reply <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">I'm A Loser ++</span></li>
  <li>Baby's In Black</li>
  <li>Rock 'n' Roll Music</li>
  <li>I'll Follow The Sun <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="bad">Mr. Moonlight &times;&times;</span></li>
  <li>Kansas City / Hey Hey, Hey Hey!</li>
  <li>Eight Days A Week <span class="bad">&times;</span></li>
  <li>Words Of Love</li>
  <li>Honey Don't</li>
  <li>Every Little Thing <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>I Don't Want To Spoil The Party</li>
  <li>What You're Doing</li>
  <li>Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby <span class="good">+</span></li>
</ol>

<p><strong>A Hard Day's Night</strong> was, without a shadow of doubt, a groundbreaking album and an important step towards the band's "artistic maturity", as they call it. Well, <strong>Beatles For Sale</strong> certainly has its merits of innovation, but they are quite shy and obscure, and mostly in terms of the <em>thematics</em> of the songs rather than the musical stylistics. The most important aspect of the album, though, is the transition that it represents, released right in the moment of "Beatlemania hangover" for the band, indicating somewhat the band's future with "serious" music.</p>

<p>All in all, the morose, bitter mood of some songs here are perfectly justified both by the band's influences (e.g. Bob Dylan) and by the weary state of mind (and body) they were in during the sessions. Of course, since this is the Beatles we're talking about, we have a good share of excellent songs here to speak about. But we also have not-so-good songs to speak about. And covers. Six of them, once again. And the only "stand-out" among them, in my opinion, is 'Mr. Moonlight', because it's truly awful. I mean, <em>really</em>: it plods on and on with its retarded rhythm and retarded arrangement. Even the organ solo is awful, and unfortunately, not even John Lennon's passionate singing can save the song. To the dumpster. The others aren't so bad, but rock 'n' roll tunes like 'Rock 'n' Roll Music' and the 'Kansas City' / 'Hey, Hey, Hey, Hey' medley, as well as Buddy Holly's 'Words Of Love', are just... slight. The other two are at least <em>funny</em>: George sings 'Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby', and the unlikeliness of him being the main character in the song is what makes the thing so worthwhile. It's an enjoyable joke. And 'Honey Don't' counts with Ringo's fun, friendly delivery. I mean, it's <em>Ringo</em>, and that's enough said. For me, at least.</p>

<p>The originals, well, are better. In general, that is. I mean, after all this time, I can only convince myself that 'Eight Days A Week' is one of the dumbest Beatles hits ever, and it pretty much shows how John and Paul were unwilling to keep spitting those syrupy love tunes. Just look at the lyrics: "Love you every day, girl / Always on my mind / One thing I can say, girl / Love you all the time". See any coherence? And no, I don't think lyrics are the most important thing on a Beatle song. And the melody is <em>nothing</em> to write home about. Though I have to say, the other attempts at "syrupy pop" aren't too bad. 'What You're Doing' has that really nice guitar riff - though not a lot more than that - and 'Every Little Thing' has a hell of an untrivial and catchy melody. If the band had had the ability to give the song a better, more sophisticated arrangement, it would have been fantastic - and hey, that's what Yes did in 1969, so there.</p>

<p>But the moodier songs are better, still. The much lauded 'I Don't Want To Spoil The Party', to me, sounds more like a rewrite of 'I'll Cry Instead', without the bite and sarcasm that made it so great. The melody is okay, though not really catchy. If a <em>great</em> melody is what you want, there's Paul's 'I'll Follow The Sun', a reworking of a song he wrote when he was a teenager. Very, very catchy and clever melody, given a fine "folk" treatment. 'Baby's In Black' is a bit more "standard" ballad, not the least bit weak, but doesn't sound too impressive coming right after the two excellent opening tracks. 'I'm A Loser' is a classic, a fast upbeat pop song that <em>would</em> be joyful if it wasn't for the bitter lyrics and the bitter melody and... eh, everything else. That's a good example of a "subversion" of what would essentially be a catchy pop single. 'No Reply' is a bit more elaborate, even, with a <em>bossa nova</em> like rhythm on the verses alternating with louder, explosive choruses. The lyrics are nicely integrated into the melody, and the song as a whole works extraordinarily well, making a good counterpoint to the faster, catchier 'I'm A Loser'.</p>

<p>The final word is that, well, the album's <em>importance</em> ends up being better than its actual content. The few truly standout tracks are quite dilluted in the more, um, washed out content, and the album as a whole isn't very striking. Not only that, but the "innovative" aspect of it can pass right through the not-so-devoted fan. Of course I won't dock any points because of that. The docking off of points is really due to the relative weakness of the collection of songs, and no more.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>11/15</strong></big> - It still has those <em>great</em> songs, but it just can't compare to its predecessor.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - The bitter songs do feel genuine, but... it's quite diluted.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Back to the covers. Nonetheless, the band is still advancing, somehow.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>11/15</strong></big> - A couple of very good songs, a couple of so-so songs and covers...<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - Heh.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/10.png" alt="10" />
</p>

<p>I'll follow the <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">mail</a>.</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="help">Help! (1965)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Ticket To Ride</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">Help! ++</span></li>
  <li>The Night Before <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">You've Got To Hide Your Love Away ++</span></li>
  <li>I Need You</li>
  <li>Another Girl</li>
  <li>You're Going To Lose That Girl</li>
  <li><span class="good">Ticket To Ride ++</span></li>
  <li>Act Naturally <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>It's Only Love</li>
  <li>You Like Me Too Much <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Tell Me What You See</li>
  <li>I've Just Seen A Face</li>
  <li><span class="good">Yesterday ++</span></li>
  <li>Dizzy Miss Lizzy</li>
</ol>

<p>You know, I think I finally understand what's so annoying about reviewing/reading reviews on the Beatles. The thing is, when you're writing a review, the least you can do is research <em>a bit</em> about what you're talking about (and this is valid not only when reviewing music!), and when it comes to the Beatles, it's unavoidable to run into those historians and Beatles enthusiasts who will say how innovative song X was because no other pop band used the chord Y before the chord Z like they do, or how the arrangement is so unusual and revolutionary on song K, or how the production techniques make song V a classic. And with all that in mind, when you finally get to <em>listen</em> to the music, it goddamn sounds just like everything you've heard to that point, and you go "huh, is that IT?". So, I realised that it's terribly annoying both to talk about Beatles music in those terms as it is to read that kind of stuff (unless you <em>are</em> an enthusiast, something I'm clearly not - or like Mogwai would say, "Enthusiast? I Amn't"). But there are certain things I just can't refuse to talk about. Take, for example, the famous title track here. You see how the third verse is played and sung only by John on the acoustic guitar, in opposition to the "full band" first verses? That might not sound to surprising these days, but you should keep in mind that nobody was used to that sort of stuff back then, and it was so significant that <em>everyone</em> does that sort of stuff now. It <em>is</em> an innovation, want it or not.</p>

<p>The trick is, "innovations" like those don't make a good song on their own. So, if you look into an album like <strong>Help!</strong> looking for the "oh these songs are so <em>different</em> from what was being made at the time", I'd tell you to change your approach before listening to it. In fact, I'd say that to anyone who was about to listen to <em>any</em> Beatles record, even <strong>Revolver</strong> and <strong>Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong>.Listen to the albums for the <em>songs</em>, dammit. Even with all the talk of the Beatles being pioneers and all, they were still an excellent pop band with hordes of great songs. And <strong>Help!</strong> has some of the most important and most excellent Beatles songs from their "non-serious" era. In terms of innovation, it certainly isn't "insignificant", but its contributions don't lie on the album as a whole, but on isolated parts of it - like the aforementioned "quiet verse" on the title track, the woodwind solo on 'You've Got To Hide Your Love Away', the string quartet on 'Yesterday', and all. But the music? Oh, now THERE'S something I can write home about.</p>

<p>Similarly to <strong>A Hard Day's Night</strong>, side A of this release consists of songs that were included on the eponymous movie. And it's, so to speak, the most "accomplished" half of the release. Side B sounds more like a couple of odds-and-ends, with notable exceptions. Side A, though, packs classics like the title track, which still <em>is</em> a grandiose pop anthem after all this time - going from John's sincere and personal lyrics to the way his main melody line is entwined with the backing vocals on the verses and the catchy falsetto hook. It's as "pocketbook manual" pop music as it could be, and ranks as one of their finest singles, in my opinion. Another classic is 'Ticket To Ride', curiously the very first Beatles recording to break the three minute barrier. It's yet another of those "proverbially perfect" songs, which you can't really improve. And it's made even better by the groovy arrangement, with the irregular drum pattern and the memorable guitar riff.</p>

<p>The other pop songs on this side, though, are painfully lightweight in comparison to those two. There isn't anything wrong with them, but if they disappeared completely, I don't think I'd miss them - in particular Paul's 'Another Girl'.'The Night Before', at least, is catchy and jumpy and fun, and I'm partial towards George's 'I Need You', especially because of how humble and understated it is next to the other songs. As for the ballads department, well, John's epic 'You've Got To Hide Your Love Away' is practically him asking Bob Dylan for an autograph. Oh, of course, it's <em>much</em> more than a mere "homage" or "imitation". It's a convincing, beautiful song with folky overtones and a good vocal delivery. And, yes, it's "countered" by the even more epic 'Yesterday', one of the most covered songs in the world, up there with Paul's own 'Michelle', 'A Whiter Shade Of Pale' and so on and so forth. The Beatles' original version, with the guitar and the string quartet, still reigns supreme for me. Most covers out there attempt at giving either more "grandiosity" to the song, or simply to Muzak it up. Paul's rendition is far more natural, flowing and gentle than anything I've heard so far. Of course, if there is a truly <em>exceptional</em> cover out there, please let me know, I don't doubt there is. But the original is always, always refreshing. The story about how Paul went around for days playing the melody for people to see if they recognised it from somewhere is also priceless. Can you imagine yourself "writing" one of the biggest classics in rock history in your dream and thinking you subcounsciously took it from somewhere? Classic.</p>

<p>Side B presents a few songs that even their respective composers slight. 'It's Only Love' is another "I really don't want to do this" John romantic number. Just listen to the way he sings "bright" and chuckles afterwards. And yes, many people would kill for a melody like this, and it's kind of a shame that John was "wasting" his efforts doing songs he really didn't want to do. 'You Like Me Too Much' is another neglected George song, and I find it really catchy, for some reason. Oh, yes, and there's the mandatory Ringo spot, 'Act Naturally', which is even funnier than 'Honey Don't'. Again, it's Ringo. I need not say any more. And closing the album off, there's the awfully unnecessary, extra generic cover of 'Dizzy Miss Lizzie', for which I have absolutely no use for. Sorry for being so harsh, but eh, oh well, maybe there's nothing better than a superflous cover to announce the most Earth-shattering phase of the Beatles - in musical terms, of course, not in Beatlemania terms. Who cares about Beatlemania anymore? Let's dig the music.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>12/15</strong></big> - The fun factor is very good overall.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - There are some very bitterly honest moments, but some rather blah moments as well.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Sure it's got very original stuff, but overall, it's not very, ver different from their past glories.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>12/15</strong></big> - No doubt about it - great stuff.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - Not really uneven, but there are some fairly unexciting stretches.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/11.png" alt="11" />
</p>

<p>Ideas? Comments? All you got to do is <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail Naturally</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="soul">Rubber Soul (1965)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>In My Life</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">Drive My Car ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown) ++</span></li>
  <li>You Won't See Me <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Nowhere Man ++</span></li>
  <li>Think For Yourself <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>The Word</li>
  <li>Michelle <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>What Goes On <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Girl <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>I'm Looking Through You <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">In My Life ++</span></li>
  <li>Wait</li>
  <li><span class="good">If I Needed Someone ++</span></li>
  <li>Run For Your Life</li>
</ol>

<p>Transitional album? Well, you sure can call it that, if you wish. But I won't. In fact, this is one of my favourite Beatles albums <em>by far</em>. Yes, this album is still a step away from the glorious phase of relentless innovation and experimentation the band was yet to get in, but like I might have implied already, I value the Beatles more for their music than to their innovation. And music <em>is</em> the big point of this album. The Beatles weren't into the business of hyperactive catchy pop anymore, so the songs are more relaxed, well thought out and clever. This album is an improvement in pretty much all areas: composition, arrangement, producton... you name it, it's got it. This is, indeed, one of the few Beales albums that I can truly <em>drool</em> on top of without guilt or shame. No covers at all - 14 original compositions and no weak links whatsoever.</p>

<p>Yes, so the album is "transitional" and all of that. That might be exactly why I like it so much! The songwriting is already evolved in it, and the arrangements already left the relative "simplicity" behind, but are not yet filled with the <em>stuff</em> that makes <strong>Revolver</strong> so remarkable. It's a gentle, soothing album, and for one, I have trouble calling it a "pop" album in the same breath as I call <strong>A Hard Day's Night</strong> a "pop" album. There's so much more here than that! Just look at the ballads. There are plenty of ballads here, and they're all splendid. 'Norwegian Wood', for all of John's homages to Bob Dylan, has the glory of being an actual influence for Dylan himself (see '4th Time Around' on <strong>Blonde On Blonde</strong>), with its memorable folky melody countered by a weird tale based on John Lennon's experiences with adultery. The use of the sitar, a real eyebrow-raiser, was really an afterthought and wasn't even the first use of the sitar on a pop recording, but heck, that doesn't matter! It's all about the song itself. Beautiful stuff. And on the flipside, there's the even better 'In My Life', a genuinely sweet and moving composition, a brilliant match of melody and lyrics, even with a piano solo by George Martin with a "Baroque" sound, achieved by double-speeding the recording. Paul brings another classic, 'Michelle', with its - pretty obvious - influence of French songs. It's sugary as hell, but hey, it's got a <em>really</em> nifty melody. It's a classic, after all, and I'm happy to live with it as it is.</p>

<p>The pop classics don't stop coming, of course. Paul contributes a couple of bitter songs, like the upbeat, catchy 'I'm Looking Through You' and the almost depressed 'You Won't See Me', both of them with rich and well written melodies and great arrangements - look out of the frenzied organ/guitar riff on the former and the constant slow down on the latter. You know, the decreasing tempo might sound like sloppy editing for some, but after all this time, I'm more bound to believe they did that on intention. As for John, there's the stunningly beautiful 'Nowhere Man', which is already very Lennon-like in terms of lyrics. And hey, what's with those three part harmonies? Very, very good. 'Girl' goes for a folky thing again, this time with mysterious lyrics about some "girl", which some have suggested to be a thinly veiled metaphor for religion. As for <em>me</em>, though, I'd speculate instead that it's a metaphor for drugs, if you remember the air sucking sound in the chorus. I mean, who really knows <em>exactly</em> what it stands for? Maybe it is just a girl, after all. What I know is that it's a really good song.</p>

<p>There are very few lacklustre spots. In fact, they're so barely lacklustre that I even hesitate in calling them lacklustre. 'The Word' is a bit forgettable, but it isn't bad while it's on, and the poppy 'Wait' is the closest thing to "filler" you'll find here because, hey, it <em>was</em> a made-up-on-the-spot song that was finished up really quickly just to fill up the remaining slot on the album; though I have to say that the fact that those guys could write a song <em>that</em> catchy on-the-spot is pretty impressive, <em>and</em> makes me wonder how they could come up with stuff like 'Eight Days A Week' in serious songwriting sessions. Heh. As for the others, there's 'Run For Your Life', which John himself hated (just <em>what</em> did John NOT hate?): an acoustic guitar driven mysoginistic tune which is not as good as most other songs here. Say, the opener, 'Drive My Car', does a great job of opening the album in a good humoured note. And what a groovy song that is! I tell you, a song that has the words "baby, I love you" <em>needs</em> to have a "beep-beep-mmm-beep-beep" in it to be as good as 'Drive My Car'.</p>

<p>Some surprises come from George Harrison. 'Think For Yourself' is already an indication of his most "self-counscious" style, bringing along a pretty fun melody and a buzzy guitar sound. His finest hour is 'If I Needed Someone', with classy guitar line, rich harmonies and oblique lyrics all coming together very, very nicely. This is one song pretty much convinces me I really like George. And of course there's a Ringo spot here: 'What Goes On', which John and Paul helped him to write. It's awkward as hell, but that's <em>just</em> what's so great about it. Can you imagine a Beatles album without a "clumsy" number in it to throw it out of boredom? I know <em>I</em> can't imagine that without getting a headache, so kudos to Ringo once again. And kudos to the band for coming up with their best release so far, and in my opinion, their best for a long while. I know I might be alone in this, but do I care? You better know the right answer.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Hell <em>yes</em>, it's enjoyable.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Almost as resonant as a Beatles album can be.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>14/15</strong></big> - This is the Beatles reaching the top of their game.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>15/15</strong></big> - No flaws anywhere as far as I can see.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Almost ideal.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/14.png" alt="14" />
</p>

<p>Complaints? Suggestions? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="revolver">Revolver (1966)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Tomorrow Never Knows</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">Taxman ++</span></li>
  <li>Eleanor Rigby <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">I'm Only Sleeping ++</span></li>
  <li>Love You To</li>
  <li>Here, There And Everywhere</li>
  <li>Yellow Submarine <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>She Said, She Said <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="bad">Good Day Sunshine &times;&times;</span></li>
  <li>And Your Bird Can Sing <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>For No One <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Doctor Robert</li>
  <li><span class="good">I Want To Tell You ++</span></li>
  <li>Got To Get You Into My Life</li>
  <li><span class="good">Tomorrow Never Knows ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>And here, the fanatics go utterly wild. Everyone already said so, but this is the big, all-important moment when the Beatles truly went for <em>it all</em>: artistic maturity, experimentation, innovation and all that <em>PRETENTIOUS CRAP</em>. No, the songs themselves don't suck (mostly), but the big emphasis of the album is in innovating production techniques, styles of composing and arrangement, and so much, that the songwriting department is almost diminished. I'd give myself a hard time if I tried to <em>bash</em> the songs in the album, and I have no reasons to do it. I'm far from disliking the album, and I'm not dumb to the point of bashing an album only because it's popular. And I'd have no other possible reasons for bashing this album, so...</p>

<p>So, well. I don't want to make a tired, clich&eacute; review of this album, nor I want to pose as a "smartarse" over it, so I'll just try to be as honest as I can. This is a strong album. This is a devastating album, probably even today, four decades after its release. Its "innovative" aspect may have been overblown through these years, because, let's face it, exactly <em>what</em> did this album bring? Indian music, yes; Tape manipulation, yes; and... oh, well, yes, the biggest asset is the package as a whole, not isolated elements. But really, the "innovations" the Beatles bring here weren't any news in the realm of music back then, but they certainly were news in the realm of <em>rock</em>music. You can't really point out the Beatles as pioneers of innovation, but here, they showed themselves to be men of vision and boldness and fearless pioneers. And the music?</p>

<p>Well, sure the music is excellent, but I can find very, very little material here that puts <strong>Rubber Soul</strong> to shame, in songwriting terms. The defining factor is the maturity, the creativity and the seriousness (yes, folks, I mean <em>seriousness</em> - after all, the jolly tunes like 'Yellow Submarine' and 'And Your Bird Can Sing' aren't there to set the mood of the album, but to <em>counter</em> the overall serious mood!). But in pure musical terms, <strong>Rubber Soul</strong> easily matches this, and since I prefer its more simple, more direct approach, you can see why this one gets a lower rating. Also, one thing that freaks me out, in a bad way, is how Paul seemed to be doing songs with the sole purpose of keeping the other Beatles as far as possible from them. Just look: 'Eleanor Rigby': Paul and the string quartet; 'Got to Get you Into My Life': Paul, Ringo and the brass band; 'For No One': Paul, Ringo and the hornist; 'Good Day Sunshine': Paul, Ringo and George Martin. John? George? Who? Oh, <em>them</em>. Give 'em some backing vocals. Yes, we all know that Paul would "dominate" the band from here, but nowhere else is the megalomania so pronounced. It's not even "control freak" I'm talking about: it's nearly pure disdain for the others. Yes, you could say that it's mainly his interest in creating new arrangements and his concern for <em>his own</em> vision of his songs. But, heck, it still bothers me, because things like this give a <em>good reason</em> for the Beatles to eventually split up. You know? It makes the event far less tragic and sad. At least for me. It's like "well, they were asking for it". And they were, pretty much.</p>

<p>And, as you might already know from previous reviews of mine, I despise 'Good Day Sunshine'. No, it's not an active hatred, or a snotty disdain, or an arrogant dismissal. Not at all: I absolutely, totally <em>can't stand</em> that thing. Its braindead two-note chorus goes all the way to try to defeat 'Can't Buy Me Love', and the music is so false, so cynical, so goddamn <em>nasty</em>, especially when meeting the grotesque "happy" lyrics, that I can't help but feeling that Paul was being awfully sarcastic without intending to do so. Or vice versa, I'm not sure. All I know is that there's <em>nothing</em> happy about this song. And I tell you that stuff like 'Dancing Queen', 'Equinoxe V', 'Popcorn' and Bob the Builder's rendition of 'Mambo #5' make me genuinely happy. 'Good Day Sunshine' plainly pisses me off. And it helps that there's nothing in it to write home about, in terms of music; it's generic "tricky" tunemaking without any worthwhile music. The good thing is that no other Paul song from here would reach that level of dreadfulness. All I can name in this album are a few "okay" songs, like the horn laden 'Got To Get You Into My Life' (huh huh huh huh, veiled marijuana lyrics, huh huh huh, BOO FUCKING HOO, mr. Paul! You're the man now, dog!), and the sweety sweet romantic ballad 'Here, There And Everywhere', that's actually quite pretty, well written, and I enjoy it when I'm in the right mood. As for the really great songs, there's 'Eleanor Rigby', that pushes the string quartet melancholia of 'Yesterday' to a much higher level. The drama of the strings arrangement and the lyrics are fully compensated by the clever, memorable melody and the harmonies in the chorus. 'For No One' is a far more personal, understated, but equally powerful and beautiful effort, featuring that classic horn solo; and not only that, but the song singlehandedly shows that Paul could be just as sincere and honest about his music as John. Or <em>almost</em> as sincere and honest, I dunno. I don't care.</p>

<p>Among the rest, there aren't any songs that I can say I dislike. 'Doctor Robert' is radically lightweight and fillerish, but there is nothing really wrong with it. And in fact, it's the only song here that I'd call "fillerish". All the others have a clear purpose for existing. I mean, even though I can't stand 'Good Day Sunshine', I'm not dumb enough to say it doesn't have a purpose for existing. It does, and so do all others here. 'And Your Bird Can Sing' is a song I can use as an example that I don't hate songs just because they sound "happy", heh heh. The doubled guitar riff,the melody and precise vocal harmonies are all perfect down to the nanosecond, and of course, the whole thing ends way before you can start grasping the bloody thing. I should say, heck, I do understand that at that time, they worried a lot with keeping their songs concise and to-the-point, but to me, it sounds like the Beatles' neurosis with always using the same song structure is more of a limitation than a technique. Say what you will about all the experimentation, the smashing majority of songs here are still verse-verse-bridge-verse-bridge-verse as always. And just to be sure, what happens when the Beatles break that structure? 'Tomorrow Never Knows', of course! No, no, obviously the main feature of the song <em>is not</em> the structure, but the whole package. Want it or not, nobody else at that time was doing such experiments with sonic collages, tape loops (yes, those ARE tape loops; you can't deny facts!) and abstract imagery crossed over with mystical thematics. The song is not just a masterpiece of studio production and trickery, but also of <em>vision</em>. Picking up a bunch of random bits of saturated tape recordings and combining them into catchy, evocative music is not just something you can pull off in a blink of the eye. The song came from absolutely <em>nowhere</em> and smashed right into history like a boulder. Ka-blam. 1966? Hoo boy.</p>

<p>Oh, yes, this album also holds the honour of being the <em>very last</em> Beatles LP to be completely dismembered in the US, by Capitol. Three tracks had already been released in <strong>Yesterday And Today</strong>: 'Doctor Robert', 'And Your Bird Can Sing' and the brilliant 'I'm Only Sleeping', a pleasant, atmospheric tune with a clear-as-water lyrical theme. Call me na&iuml;ve, but I don't see any drug references in the song. It's irresistibly fun to let the song take you away, floating. Oh, and there's the use of backwards tapes, expanding further the technique used first in 'Rain'. On the other hand, there's the fucktastic 'She Said, She Said'. In a way, it's almost as bold as 'Tomorrow Never Knows', with John meshing spaced-out, apparently incoherent lyrics with an intense haze of loud drums and distorted guitar, as well as odd rhythmic shifts. It's pretty much an intentional attept at disorienting the listener as much as possible.</p>

<p>I'm also highly fond of George's pieces, which are growing as strong as ever. 'Love You To', well... You know, in a way, George here is doing pretty much what I accused Paul of doing, just a few paragraphs above. The song is played purely with Indian instruments, by Indian musicians, leaving all the other Beatles aside. And here, he's really just carrying further a personal interest of his, which had <em>nothing</em> to do with the band as a whole. Well, at least he compensated the "detour" with two excellent "full band" compositions, which in my humble opinions, are far superior to 'Love You To'. I have nothing against Indian music, and hey, maybe I don't know much about it. To me, the song seems lacking in content, though. It boasts a really good arrangement, though, resulting in a really rough, heavy performance - even with a "rock 'n' roll" sitar riff. The other two compositions are downright grand, though. 'I Want To Tell You' is a perfectly catchy pop song with a pretty poignant set of lyrics, and fine uses of harmonies everywhere. 'Taxman' is even better, blasting in with a strong rhythm - both on the drums and on the guitar - with an awfully effective melody,awesomely bitter lyrics about taxes, and a right-on-the-money guitar solo by Paul. I just wonder if there was any better way to open this album than with 'Taxman'.</p>

<p>As for Ringo, he has what's probably his most classic vocal performance with 'Yellow Submarine', and even though he didn't write it, it's one of my favourite "Ringo songs", anyway. I don't know why some people still feel the need to complain about that track. Oh, well, I guess they have the right to complain about it, just as I have the right to complain about 'Good Day Sunshine', but hey... I'm not bitching over a song just because it's <em>humourous</em>, right? I actually value humour in music (at least GOOD humour), and that's just why I hate 'Good Day Sunshine'. So there. <strong>Revolver</strong>, as a whole, isn't really a "good humoured" album. It's ambitious as hell, and ambition doesn't seem to go too well with good humour, at least not with the Beatles. But the music is good, and everyone should get this album, if only just to listen to it and say it's <em>soo</em> much better than that overrated <strong>Sgt. Pepper</strong> crap.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Hoo, this is more fun than 'Dragostea Din Tei'.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - I should say, this is <em>not</em> one of the album's strongest points - a few songs excepted.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Well, huh?<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Oh, yeah, the Beatles reached their peak here, didn't they? No?... Oh.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - The songs never stop coming! Heck, even I need a break sometimes, right?
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/12.png" alt="12" />
</p>

<p><em>Reader comments:</em></p>

<div class="commentsHeader">
      <strong><a href="mailto:amishrevolt97@msn.com">Mike Bryant</a> (July 3, 2004):</strong>
</div>

<div class="comments">
<p>Beatles: <strong>Revolver</strong></p>
<ol>
<li><span class="good">Taxman ++</span></li>
<li><span class="good">Eleanor Rigby ++</span></li>
<li><span class="good">I'm Only Sleeping ++</span></li>
<li>Love You To <span class="good">+</span></li>
<li><span class="good">Here, There, and Everywhere ++</span></li>
<li>Yellow Submarine <span class="good">+</span></li>
<li><span class="good">She Said She Said ++</span></li>
<li>Good Day Sunshine <span class="good">+</span></li>
<li><span class="good">And Your Bird Can Sing ++</span></li>
<li><span class="good">For No One ++</span></li>
<li>Doctor Robert</li>
<li>I Want to Tell You <span class="good">+</span></li>
<li><span class="good">Got to Get You Into My Life ++</span></li>
<li><span class="good">Tomorrow Never Knows ++</span></li>
</ol>
 
<p>The Beatles must have found something particularly nice to smoke when they were making this album.  Oh yeah that's right, they had started taking LSD.  It's not as experimental as some people make it out to be.  The album is stuffed with 2:30 long pop songs that sound as good today as they must have back in 1966.  When you think about it, the only real experimental song is "Tomorrow Never Knows."  And what an experimental song it is!  Proto-techno?  Ringo's driving, backwards beat is a great backbone, as John quotes the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and Paul scribbles tape loops and what sounds like crows screaming over the take.  It's hard to describe the enticing atmosphere of the song, but it's probably the best psychedelic song they ever did.  The amazing thing is that The Beatles pack so many catchy riffs in such a short time.  Both Lennon rockers, "And Your Bird Can Sing" and "She Said She Said", are extremely catchy.  "And Your Bird Can Sing" has this joyous guitar sound to it!  Plus <strong>Revolver</strong> has one of the best three song openings in the history of rock.  George's kick-ass "Taxman" has an awesome bass line, and cool lyrics.  John's "I'm Only Sleeping" sounds so beautifully sleepy (there's even a yawn in the song) and should be an anthem for teenagers and college students everywhere.  To round out John's contributions, "Doctor Robert" is probably the only weak link in the chain.  But it's a fun little song.  Not that bad, just not as great as the other songs.  George's "I Want to Tell You" is a fine, if typical, George song.  Not that being a typical George song is bad!  Speaking of typical, "Good Day Sunshine" and "Got to Get You Into My Life" are typical Paul songs.  The latter is a soul/pop song only using brass as the backing instruments.  The former is a simple McCartney upbeat pop song which seems to garner a lot of hate on this site.  Eh, it's a fine song.  It never annoys me really, but I can see how it might if you're not in a particularly "sunny" mood.  I don't understand it Fernie, isn't Brazil always sunny? <span class="edNote">[Editor's note: It's a big country, you see. I'm far down to the South, in a temperate zone, so it's not always sunny here. But up there, in the regions closer to the Equator, yes, the weather is almost like a neverending summer! I think.]</span>  But Paul also wrote two very untypical McCartney songs: "For No One" and "Eleanor Rigby".  Well, maybe not "For No One".  "Eleanor Rigby" is of course the famous single using only strings and violins.  I think it's one of the saddest songs ever written as it's about the things lonely people do to keep from feeling useless and lonely, but end up failing.  "Eleanor Rigby died in the church and was buried along with her name, nobody came."  "For No One" is a beautiful piano ballad about a lost love.  Another famous song is "Yellow Submarine" which is a very fun to sing along to.  And "Love You To" is probably the best George sitar song.  I think Paul sums the album up the best: "It depends what you want from an album, but if you really look at it bluntly, most people just want good songs.  There's a lot of good songs on <strong>Revolver</strong>.  In fact, they're all good."  Amen, Paul.</p>

<p>Rating:</p>
<p>
Fun Factor: <strong>10/10</strong> - I dare you to find an album that is more fun.<br />
Resonance: <strong>10/10</strong> - This Beatles album hits me emotionally more than any other<br />
Originality: <strong>10/10</strong> - Anything less would be a travesty<br />
Richness: <strong>10/10</strong> - Countless catchy moments in a half hour.<br />
Solidness: <strong>10/10</strong> - I couldn't imagine the album ordered any other way.
</p>

<p>Total: 10 = <big><big>10</big></big></p>
</div>

<p>Complaints? Suggestions? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="band">Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <em>Er, </em><big>A Day In The Life</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>With A Little Help From My Friends <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds ++</span></li>
  <li>Getting Better</li>
  <li>Fixing A Hole <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>She's Leaving Home <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite! ++</span></li>
  <li>Within You Without You</li>
  <li>When I'm 64</li>
  <li>Lovely Rita <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Good Morning, Good Morning ++</span></li>
  <li>Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (reprise) <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">A Day In The Life ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>Call it "overrated" at will, but I like this more than <strong>Revolver</strong>. And I guarantee it has nothing to do with its status, or its hype, or anything. Much less with the album cover, or with the alleged "conceptuality" of it, etc.. Not that a bit of history would hurt, so anyway, the album <em>began</em> from an idea of making the whole album as a "performance" by Paul's fictitious band. And if the idea had been carried all the way to the end, this would have been one of the first rock concept albums, and easily one of the most successful. Unfortunately (or fortunately?),they gave up the idea shortly after the sessions began. It seems writing music was more important to them than giving it a fancy "presentation", and the band was already not united enough to carry something like that forward, after all. There was a bit of tension within the band, especially between George and Paul, sparked when Paul discarded completely a solo George wrote for the title track. But this is still very far from the Great Collapse.</p>

<p>This album is... well, it's <em>different</em>. This isn't really an "evolution" from the previous album, but a change of goal. The Beatles sound no longer interested in going places where no man has ever went, but places where <em>they</em> had never went. That is, now instead of sonic collages, astral travels and abstract lyrical painting, what you get here is a playful pallete of styles and influences that sound <em>anything</em> but "Beatley". And yes, it's a <em>playful</em> thing. In that particuar aspect, it's very different from <strong>Revolver</strong>, which is almost always too busy trying to deliver an Earth-shattering musical statement. <strong>Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong>, even though it still has that characteristic meticulousity and self-consciousness, is a very light, friendly album. Well, not <em>every</em> song is, but the package as a whole is. After all, the album still counts with freaked-out trips, obscure lyrical thematics and disorentingly novel musical ideas (like in the last track), but overall, I find it more enjoyable. It's like all the experience they earned here is applied to something immediately charming.</p>

<p>Oh, yes, of course, this album is the "voice of a generation", or something. It's the album that embodies 1967 in pretty much all aspects. But you know what? I don't care. Maybe it's just because I'm not interested in <em>that</em> kind of culture specifically, but hey, I think it's just because the music is good enough to stand on its own, away from all the historical importance. If the music were weak, I <em>would</em> have to give lots of attention to how important it was back on its time, but no, the music is strong. And, for one, there isn't <em>any</em> songs here for me to complain about! That's right. No weak links. Weaker spots, yes, but nothing that spoils the album the least. The weaker that the songs get is McCartney's 'When I'm 64', which isn't at all dismissable, but it sounds like nothing but comedy relief when placed next to all the other songs. As a standalone, it's an entertaining, catchy ditty about the most legendary video game console ever, with the clever use of a clarinet ensemble. It's a clever song, with a clever set of lyrics. The other songs just end overshadowing it.</p>

<p>Paul himself contributes some much better stuff, though most songs here aren't exclusive Paul or John creations. Still, we can consider the title track, 'She's Leaving Home', 'Getting Better' and 'Lovely Rita' as genuine Paul McCartney songs. The title track kicks off with an exciting mix of a psychedelic rock groove with the "presentation" of the band, complete with orchestra and audience cheering. It's a great conceptual piece, though there are very few of those here. It's followed by the classic 'With A Little Help From My Friends', with Ringo as "Billy Shears". It's simple, uplifting and catchy with all its might, and <em>much</em> better than that overblown Joe Cocker version. After that, you ought to get ready for a pretty unpredictable ride. I'll admit that 'Getting Better' gets a bit on my nerves,but mostly because of that annoyingly constant (and constantly annoying! Ha ha, ha ha) "ting ting ting-y-ting" sound. Yes, it's novelty, but novelty really loses its value when it's irritating. And 'She's Leaving Home' stands on shaky ground, with a solely orchestral arrangement with is constantly on the verge of becoming awfully corny. Still, it's a well written song, even a bit touching, delivered by Paul with an unusually "deadpan" feel, like he isn't at all trying to "defend" neither the runaway daughter nor the abandoned parents. This ends up improving considerable the effect of the story unfolding over the slow verses. Pretty good, I says!</p>

<p>But hey, there's a lot of good stuff here. The only <em>serious</em> downside is the lack of Harrison compositions. There's precisely one, here, and it's a "continuation" of the Indian oriented trend (not used in a derogatory way, mind) started on 'Love You To'. And this time, 'Within You, Without You' is a full-blown five minutes long, and much more traditionally Indian than 'Love You To'. The instrumentation is fully Indian (with a small appearance of a strings ensemble), very loose and improvised, and it mostly drones on and on. I like it very much, even though it <em>is</em> an interruption of the album's flow, but for heck's sake, it's the only Harrison song here. I can deal with that. Either way, 'Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds' is a fabulous creation, with all those different bits of music and contrasting instrumentation going against each other, yet coming up nicely together. It's one of the greatest landmarks of psychedelia, and it manages to be so in a very uncompromised way. Perhaps because it was highly influenced by stories for children and his son's drawing. It's a classic, and if you think about it, the only really "catchy" melody comes in the chorus. The verses get on simply with that cool blend of instruments. John's 'Being For The Benefit Of Mr.Kite' fills in the "darker" side of trippiness, highly influenced by an ancient circus poster and fairground music. The music is a pretty exciting blend of fairly unsettling harmonic and melodic twists, complete with random mixes of fairground music. It's one of my favourites in the album.</p>

<p>Another great track is the marching 'Good Morning, Good Morning', filled with brass arrangements and a rather biting set of lyrics set to pretty cheery music. The unclear rhythm changes are becoming quite a trademark of John, as of now,aren't they? Oh, well. I guess so, at least. 'Fixing A Hole' goes along in an enjoyable, "moodier" tone (mostly goofy, of cours), and 'Lovely Rita' is upbeat, catchy, and pretty amusing. Those two songs are some of the "lightest" in terms of arrangement and instrumentation, and the reprise of the title track is one of the few things that remind you of "rock" in the album. And it's one minute long, of course, and it leads into one of the biggest stand-outs in the Beatles catalogue, 'A Day In The Life'. The song ties together two "half-finished" pieces, one from John and one from Paul, but using tricks that are just <em>anything</em> but conventional in pop music. Yes, I say "conventional <em>in pop music</em>" because, hey, dissonance was nothing new back then, and even improvisation in an orchestral setting wasn't unexplored territory. But one thing is for an artist to have an idea of dissonance and improvisation as a serious artistic statement of sorts, and another thing is a pop band in 1967 having this idea as mainly a contrivance to fill up 24 bars of emptiness. And it's a contrivance that <em>works wonders</em>; several recordings of the orchestra are laid on top of each other, so instead of anything calculated or academic, you have the orchestra speeding down the road like a train heading downhill straight into a wall. And they do it twice, yes, once as the transition from John's part into Paul's part, and another to close the song - just before a three-piano major chord, which is <em>another</em> contrivance that worked. But, as you might suspect, the song wouldn't get its place as "best song" here just because of the tricks. The music itself is great, and the giddy, cheery Paul part perfectly complements the deadpan, slightly sad John part. It's true that Paul's part falls mostly as a "middle-8" to the song, but the package as a whole is great. It has a certain "epic" sweep, which is just a result of the melody being so good. It's an excellent, balanced package.</p>

<p>Call me puerile, if you wish, for rating this higher than the oh-so-beloved <strong>Revolver</strong>. I won't mind.If anything, I'll be delighted that you fall so easily into the consensus. Ha ha! I'm so anti-trendy. Well, it's true, this album is much more enjoyable to me, and all the "experimentation" in it doesn't detract from the music. In short, this is a must-have, and it's nonsense to listen to it or talk to it solely from a "historical" standpoint. Just get into the music and forget everything else. It'll be fine.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Hoo, this is more fun than <strong>Revolver</strong>.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Well, hmm... it depends on what <em>exactly</em> is supposed to resonate here. Emotions? Nah.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>15/15</strong></big> - It's stupid not to think of this as insanely original.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>15/15</strong></big> - I can't find anything to complain about here.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Well, <em>this</em> flows well, already.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/13.png" alt="13" />
</p>

<p><em>Reader comments:</em></p>

<div class="commentsHeader">
      <strong><a href="mailto:awoehrel@netcarrier.com">Andrew Woehrel</a> (February 22, 2004):</strong>
</div>

<div class="comments">
<p><strong>Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong><br />
Best Song: DAY IN THE LIFE. OMG YES. No, wait, not Yes, the Beatles. My bad.</p>

<p>This is one "neat" album...it has some fantastic songs and some weird novelty stuff that screams "FILLER". But you know what? I don't care. It rules.<br />
The album starts off with the title track, with some distorted guitar riffs, a cool groove, and some fantastic John (or is it Paul?) vocals, and segues flawlessly into With a Little Help From my Friends, which also rules, with some Ringo vocals. Is it just me, or doesn't Ringo's voice make you always feel happy? <span class="edNote">[editor's note: YES!!]</span> I love this cute little song. About drugs. How nice.</p>
 
<p>This reminds me, this album is called a drug album for many reasons. Track 2 is a song that seems like it's about drugs, but probably isnt, Track 3, you KNOW its about drugs, but it's not. Track 7? It's so crazy you'd think John was on drugs while writing it. (and he probably was.) and the last track? You don't think it's about drugs, but it is. and turning you on.</p>
 
<p>Anyway. LSD time. You know that Simpsons episode where Lisa takes laughing gas? It's my favorite episode ever, Last Exit to Springfield. Well, Lisa imagines she's undersea in the Yellow Submarine world, and she sees the Beatles, and one of them (Ringo?) says "Hey look! It's lisa in the Sky! no diamonds though."<br />
Whatevah, I got off track. Lisa, er, 'Lucy in the Sky W/ Diamond' rules. It's trippy.(Hey, that above Lisa part was by accidenty, I really typed Lisa, then realized it was wrong, but kept it because it was kinda funny. Heh....</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Fuck. We're such losers.)</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Getting Better has some weeeeeird guitar noise <span class="edNote">[editor's note: by the way, it's George Martin hitting the piano strings with a hammer. Or, at least, that's what some Beatles websites say]</span>, and I don't like the lyrics, especially in the "wife beating" part. Wtf? Kinda creepy, but all in all, it's a good song. I guess.  Fixing a hole kinda goes nowhere, and She's Leaving Home is too long. Eleanor Rigby please. For the Benefit... is wEiRd....WWWWOOOOoooooooAAAAAAAAHHHHHHhhhhhhhh... Some weird effects and loops, and of course, Henry the Horse dances the waltz.<br />
Within You Without You is kinda...just a George Indian song. it's decent, though. Fits the eerie mood of the album. I like When I'm Sixty-Four, it's happy and poppy and fun. Paul is a great songwriter, even if he is a total douchnozzle. Hey, that's a funny word. I'd better stop trying to be funny, or I might start acting like Brad Holmes and USING LOTS OF CAPITALS AND FUCKING CURSING A WHOLE GODDAMN MUCH. Yeah. Nice reviews he's got though. Fernie should take a note from him an review some Smashing Pumpkins, Flaming Lips, more Rolling Stones, and other bands that are a plural inanimate object with a adjective that ends with "ing". <span class="edNote">[editor's note: hmm, note taken]</span><br />
Oh yeah, off topic again. Damn, this is why I had my old reviews deleted in the first place. Where were we? Lovely Rita, nice song. All of these songs seem to be like little filler tracks, but I DON'T CARE, and I'll explain later.<br />
Good Morning, Good Morning is cool, with all the sound effects, my friend calls this song "The most obnoxious song ever." Heh. Wacky punk. The title track reprise is even better than the first, even if it's shorter, it has a kickass geetar solo and a FINE groove. damn. <br />
and here we go. The ending track, the best Beatles song of all time. It's everything. Sad, happy, dark, joyous, oppressive, exciting, lovely, scary, intimate and dramatic. All at fucking once. And drug references too. This song, by it's fucking self, redeems everything. Damn, it's good. this is one of my favorite songs ever. Wow. WOW. WOOOOOOOOOOW. Once this track is over, I don't care that I spent the last half hour listening to lots of silly songs to hear a few groovy rockers, drug anthems, pop tunes, and sound effects, because I'm left with...nEvErCoUlDbEaNyOtHeRwAynEvErCoUlDbEaNyOtHeRwAynEvErCoUlDbEaNyOtHeRwAynEvErCoUlDbEaNyOtHeRwAy
Go get this album, JUST for Day In The Life. The ONLY complain I have with this song is it's too short. The silly bouncy Paul section fits in perfectly with the gorgeously sad John section. hell yeah.</p>
 
<p>Yep, there you have it. <strong>Sgt. Pepper's One and Only Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong>. We do hope you'll enjoy the show.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>"Watch out for the giant crappy drawing of Queen Elizabeth! ARRRGGHHH!!"</p>
</div>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Send me your ideas</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="tour">Magical Mystery Tour (1967)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>I Am The Walrus</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Magical Mystery Tour</li>
  <li>The Fool On The Hill <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Flying <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Blue Jay Way <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Your Mother Should Know</li>
  <li><span class="good">I Am The Walrus ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Hello, Goodbye ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Strawberry Fields Forever ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Penny Lane ++</span></li>
  <li>Baby, You're A Rich Man</li>
  <li><span class="good">All You Need Is Love ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>An American release? Yup. Actually, this was a "Double EP" in England, but this release was adopted as "official" because the double A-side 'Strawberry Fields Forever'/'Penny Lane' single got added on the US release. Not a bad move, really. Even though Capitol didn't have <em>any</em> worries with putting already released singles on albums, an attitude Parlophone condemned, historically, this was a good move. The singles fit in flawlessly, and overall improve the scope of the album. Did you know that those songs, in fact, were intended to be on <strong>Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong>? And that George Martin greatly regrets having offered those songs as singles? Well, I'm sure he has his reasons, and the presence of those two tracks on the album would have enhanced it incredibly. But also, they would <em>completely</em> outshine the weaker tracks, whouldn't they? It would have lost a bit of its consistency, maybe. So, well, here we have this "compilation" of sorts.</p>

<p>It's not a compilation, it's true, but it isn't an "album" properly. I don't care, of course. The style of the music here hasn't changed a lot since the last album. You can almost think of this as an "addendum" to <strong>Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong>. That isn't a way to dismiss it, mind you; it's just that the style is still very similar: odd mixes of instruments, psychedelia, silly lyrics, everything. And it isn't stagnation, either: like I said before, the double A-side songs were recorded during the <strong>Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong> sessions, for example. And by the way, they're both fantastic songs, as I might have already implied. In mood, they're quite drastically opposed, with 'Strawberry Fields Forever' being moody and gloomy, and 'Penny Lane' quite optimistic, slightly nostalgic. Musically, also, they're distinct; 'Strawberry Fields Forever' concenrating heavily on the novel, almost disorienting arrangements and studio effects (this song features the legendary edit between two completely different versions of the song), and 'Penny Lane' focusing on the pure, sweet melody. Both brilliant and classic in their own ways.</p>

<p>There are some other songs that invariably outshine the others, like the legendary 'All You Need Is Love', a sweeping anthem in every possible aspect - a melody crafted specifically for singing along, simple and direct lyrics and a constant build-up towards the puffed-up finale. I dunno, but you gotta be amused by the way they juxtapose 'Greensleeves', 'In The Mood' and 'She Loves You' at the end - not to mention, of course, the hilarious intro ripped straight from 'La Marsellaise'. Somehow, that's just too clever and fun. 'Hello, Goodbye' is one of those typical Beatles songs that couldn't be any dumber, but couldn't be any better, either. The festive arrangement surrounds you completely, and leaves no place for you to escape to. Not that the song doesn't have melodic content, but it's really the crazy arrangements that make the song spin. And you can't talk about arrangements without mentioning 'I Am The Walrus', can you? Because that one not only manages to pack crazy music with crazy arrangements <em>and</em> so many whacked-out tape edits and all sorts of intrusions - including a live radio broadcast of <em>King Lear</em> at the finale. And of course, to augment that, Lennon writes the most insane, senseless set of lyrics in the history of The Beatles; and there's no fear in calling it "senseless" because that was John's very intention. The weirdness just doesn't stop coming, and never stops amusing me, of course. And the weirdness isn't just the crazy lyrics or anything, but also, for example, how the lonely, climactic "I'm crying" verses stand out from the whole rest of the song. <em>And</em> I haven't mentioned that it has what's probably my favourite intro <em>and</em> outro for a Beatles song ever.</p>

<p>Those are the best songs here. And the others are, well, not as good, obviously. Yes, there are some songs here that I almost don't care at all about, like the title track, which is always constantly trying to soar up into the skies, but never manages to do so. And 'Baby You're A Rich Man', well, I've never been able to enjoy it too much. But the complaints really stop there, if you're willing to call those "complaints". I even like the instrumental 'Flying', which is every bit as irrelevant as it is laid-back and enjoyable. 'Your Mother Should Know' doesn't have anything that makes it stand out from its status as "innofensive pop", but it's really fun. George's sole composition, 'Blue Jay Way', <em>does</em> stand out with its hazy, eerie but not quite gloomy atmosphere, strange sounds and ambivalent melody. Finally, 'The Fool On The Hill' is one of Paul's purest, sweetest ballads ever. The melody and arrangement are downright perfect, and Paul succeeds in not "oversweetening" it. So, I have mentioned every song here, but I don't think there's any bad in that. There are only eleven of them here. And interestingly, it is longer than every album previous to <strong>Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong>. And that's good. I mean, these songs are longer because they are properly developed. Can you imagine a two-minute-long 'I Am The Walrus'? If it were released in <strong>Revolver</strong>, that's certainly how it would have been. So be it. This is a darned fine Beatles release and a welcome addition to anyone's Beatles collection.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>13/15</strong></big> - The great songs are so great that the not-great songs don't even harm the "album" that much.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Essentially the same "psychedelic" trip stuff, with a little more hard-hitting stuff.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Can't say there's a lot of pioneerism here. Just the usual Beatles creativity.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>14/15</strong></big> - While the previous album was saturated with good stuff, this one is just full of it.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - It's... a bunch of songs. Was it ever intended to "flow" well?
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/12.png" alt="12" />
</p>

<p>All you need is <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">mail</a>.</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="thebeatles">The Beatles (1968)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Helter Skelter</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">Back In The USSR ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Dear Prudence ++</span></li>
  <li>Glass Onion</li>
  <li>Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da</li>
  <li>Wild Honey Pie</li>
  <li>The Continuing Story Of Bungalow Bill</li>
  <li><span class="good">While My Guitar Gently Weeps ++</span></li>
  <li>Happiness Is A Warm Gun <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Martha My Dear <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>I'm So Tired <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Blackbird</li>
  <li>Piggies <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Rocky Raccoon</li>
  <li>Don't Pass Me By <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Why Don't We Do It On The Road</li>
  <li>I Will <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="bad">Julia &times;&times;</span></li>
  <li>Birthday <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Yer Blues <span class="bad">&times;</span></li>
  <li>Mother Nature's Son</li>
  <li>Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me And My Monkey <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Sexy Sadie <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Helter Skelter ++</span></li>
  <li>Long, Long, Long <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Revolution 1 <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Honey Pie</li>
  <li>Savoy Truffle <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Cry, Baby, Cry</li>
  <li>Revolution 9</li>
  <li>Good Night <span class="good">+</span></li>
</ol>

<p>And this is... this is overkill. This album is often cited as many people's favourite Beatles album. Possibly because it's so big and "diverse" and such. Well, you know how much I care about diversity. If you don't, just let me tell you that very often I prefer an album to have a single, or very few, well developed moods than an album that tries to be everything at once. And this album fits the latter case. And this might be one of the Beatles albums that I listen to <em>the least</em>; if only because that the idea of sitting through one hour and a half of inconsistent Beatles music isn't at all appealing to me (yes, not only this is a double LP, but each side has more than twenty two minutes of music). Let's not be all entirely negative, though: considering its length and quantity of songs, and the fact that there was an interval of little more than one year between this and <strong>Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</strong>, there's a surprising amount of good songs here. But overall, the album is bogged down by the sheer overkill, not to mention the very irritating songs, and the least I can do is fish out the good songs and listen to them separated from the rest.</p>

<p>Ok, there might be a lot of injustified negativity here. But I can't stomach the album. Like I already said, I don't care about diversity. I mean, take a song like 'Rocky Raccoon', and you'll see it's pretty much Paul saying "Look, I can do country western too", or 'Honey Pie', and you'll notice it's him again saying "Look, I can do 1920's too", or 'Yer Blues' and you'll notice it's John saying "Look, I can do bitter blues too". And I say, well, who cares? Why should <em>I</em> care? I won't go around saying "OMG the Beatles are GODS because they can do every music genre on Earth". If I'm going to do anything like that, I'd rather praise Evan Lurie and Douglas Wieselman's work on <em>The Backyardigans</em>, in which they don't visit dozens of different music genres just to show they can, but actually to entertain, and actually to entertain <em>children</em>, <em>and</em> adults as well (don't DARE call me an adult!). The stuff in this album sound more like a "demonstration" than anything. And I have no use for them. Yes, there are a few exceptions for that. For example, 'Helter Skelter' is pretty much a plain attempt at out-rocking The Who, but not merely beating them in their own game: the Beatles pull off the most chaotic, brutal and purposefully, ridiculously exaggerated performance of their carreer as a band. And this is <em>really</em> exaggerated, even to today's standards, with guitar distortion turned all the way up, a naggingly sharp bass note, feedback noise almost all the way through, screaming Paul vocals, obnoxiously obsessive lyrics about a playground and disoriented fading in/out at the end. Of course, all of that comes together to make a fabulous piece, and one of my favourite Beatles songs ever. And there's John's 'Revolution 9', an eight minute long montage of found sounds, random speech and classical music and whatever else John put his hands on. And I mean this can't be considered as a "demonstration" of skills because John really intended to deliver a statement with it. Heavily influenced by infamous Yoko Ono, this piece of performance art - or whatever you wish to call it - manages to go completely against an album that's widely regarded for its "eclecticism". After all, it's not accessible at all. At worst, it's the most boring thing the Beatles could have put on a record. At best, it's a pretty frightening piece. I don't know who would consider its "artistic" significance; the Beatles delivering a biting political or social commentary is as meaningful as U2 singing praises to Satan. But in fact, I like the piece, if only because it's a pretty impressive accomplishment on a technical level, and it does succeed in creating a scary, apocalyptic mood. I don't think it's any <em>essential</em> piece, though. It's good, but not necessary.</p>

<p>That's more than what I can say about some songs here, unfortunately. I know the Paul bitching might be getting a bit tiresome, but what can I do? In this album, he really starts to show that he trusted <em>too much</em> in his sense of humour. And one result of that is 'Rocky Raccoon', his "hilarious" excouse into country western, in which he tells a "hilarious" story by repeating a single 4-bar melody about 47 times. Yes, it does get tiresome. And annoying. 'Honey Pie' is his homage to music hall, and while it's pretty impressive that he achieved a <em>very</em> genuine performance, I have no use for it. I also can't say I like the self-indulgent folk send-up of 'Mother Nature's Son', either. The melody and arrangement are okay, but nothing to write home about. This is one of those songs that, while not bad, just help boggle down the album as a whole. A similar thing happens with the "experimental" (yes, notice the quotes) bits like 'Wild Honey Pie' (deranged acoustic guitar plucking and goofy vocals) and 'Why Don't We Do It In The Road' ("raunchy" slow rock send-up with Paul handling all instruments), but at least they're really short.</p>

<p>It's not just Paul who deserves the complaints, see. John's 'Cry, Baby, Cry' doesn't have a lot going on, and 'The Continuing Story Of Bungalow Bill', albeit enjoyable, borders on severe annoyance. As an isolated song it's fine, though. It sounds pretty weak compared to the other songs, though. Oh, yes, and I can't stand 'Julia'. Again, just like 'Good Day Sunshine', it's not a song that causes a conscious, purposeful hatred. I just can't stand it. But hey, I've got a decent reason for that. All John does is repeat that same goddamn guitar line and sing the same goddamn notes through three minutes straight, with little variation. The worst, of course, is how he has to extend those notes for ages. This is a case, I suppose, of a song trying to pass off solely on the "emotional" factor. Well, I ask you, am I <em>obliged</em> to worship the song just because it's about John's late mother? I don't suppose so. As far as I know, it's not a crime not liking every single song about dead people.</p>

<p>Fortunately, there's enough great stuff here to... to, well, fill up a single LP with. Though if I were to "compile"a single LP out of these songs, my choices would probably be a bit unorthodox. For example, I really like 'Revolution 1', way more than its respective single version, in fact; if only because the slow blues rhythm, laidback vocals and slightly humourous delivery gives the song a delightful ironic edge. Besides, I like to savour that great melody with cool acoustic guitar and backing vocals. On the other hand, I think I can live without the upbeat, boppy 'Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da', though I don't have nothing against with it. 'Martha My Dear' is goody goody, with untrivial, jazzy arrangements, a real catchy melody, and lyrics that don't sound like Paul really intended to sound "aw, he's singing about his dog, how CUTE", but more like he couldn't bother writing something more "highbrow". And I also like the lovely acoustic pop of 'I Will', even more than the classic 'Blackbird', though that's more due to personal taste than to principles or anything. And, of course, I'd be crazy if I didn't like the ultra-entertaining 'Back In The USSR' - <em>especially</em> featuring the lines "Back in the US-- / Back in the US-- / Back in the USSR!", and call me crazy if you wish, but I'm fairly sure he did that on purpose, if you know what I mean.</p>

<p>Oh, yes, the album's pretty good when it comes to rock songs. 'Back In The USSR' is great, one of my favourites here, but I also like the spontaneous, delightful 'Birthday' and the crazy, groovy 'Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me And My Monkey'. George's 'Savoy Truffle' has a fairly acid, bitter sound, but its lyrics have nothing philosophical about them - they're merely about Eric Clapton's chocolate eating habits. And, hooray, the album isn't at all hopeless with ballads: John's 'Sexy Sadie' is a classic, with that awesome doubled piano sound. And no one can forget 'While My Guitar Gently Weeps', one of George's most well-known and beautiful songs of the Beatles era. Delicate, pretty, and somehow pretty grand and troubled, too, with Clapton on the lead guitar and all. Those chord changes and pounding rhythm don' sound very happy, you know. 'Long, Long, Long' is very understated and very spiritual,but one shouldn't overlook it - especially that crazy, spaced-out ending. I really love that.</p>

<p>It's true that 'While My Guitar Gently Weeps' went as a great classic, but I don't think 'Dear Prudence' stays too far behind, with its unstoppable mounting of tension. It really sticks out from anything the Beatles did to that point,in terms of balladry. It's serious, but nowhere near overblown. It's carried out masterfully. Aside from that one, John hits the bullseye with the unpredictable, delightfully sarcastic 'Happiness Is A Warm Gun', the beautiful, bluesy 'I'm So Tired', and 'Glass Onion', which is pretty much a hangover from all the psychedelia. I don't like 'Yer Blues' the least, though, and I'd be a better person without it, thank you. The vocal performance, somehow, <em>really</em> gets on my nerves, and the raving bluesmen lyrics don't strike me at all. I mean, John was really good with irony, and if he <em>really</em> felt like this back at that time, I can only feel sorry for the fact that he could have chosen a much better way to deliver his feelings.</p>

<p>And that's the way the album goes: up-and-down. And I'm hardly in the right frame of mind to endure the whole thing.At least, the album <em>is</em> noteworthy for having some true classics, aside from Ringo's second best self-penned Beatles song ever, 'Don't Pass Me By' - which, yes, I <em>really</em> like, if only because it's so simple and uncompromised. Other than that, real Beatles fans will have this somewhere around the very top of their book - probably in the place where I keep my <strong>Dark Side Of The Moon</strong>, or my <strong>Tubular Bells</strong>. That's fine by me, of course. I hope <em>other</em> people are fine with the rating I give this, though. Not that I care, of course.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>11/15</strong></big> - To say this is a mixed bag is one major understatement.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - Hmm, well, by the end of the album, my brain is numb.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>13/15</strong></big> - The Beatles were inventing practically nothing here. They were just solidifying their legacy. Masterfully, of course.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>13/15</strong></big> - I won't say the music here is badly written, but some stuff here gets very close.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - I'm not in the mood for jokes.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/11.png" alt="11" />
</p>

<p>*yawn* <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>.</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="road" class="best">Abbey Road (1969)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>I Want You (She's So Heavy)</big><em>. There. I said it.</em>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">Come Together ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Something ++</span></li>
  <li>Maxwell Silver Hammer <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Oh! Darling ++</span></li>
  <li>Octopus' Garden <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">I Want You (She's So Heavy) ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Here Comes The Sun ++</span></li>
  <li>Because <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">You Never Give Me Your Money ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Sun King ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Mean Mr. Mustard ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Polythene Pam ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">She Came In Through The Bathroom Window ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Golden Slumbers ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Carry That Weight ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">The End ++</span></li>
  <li>Her Majesty</li>
</ol>

<p>Since I didn't spend too much time telling the band's history here, I should say, in case you don't know, that shortly after the release of their self-titled double album, the band went boom. They started working on a couple of new songs, but the whole thing fell apart, the band members couldn't stand seeing each other, and so on. The project would be later resurfaced by Phil Spector, but before that, the band reunited to record their <em>true</em> swansong. And we are lucky to have a <em>true</em> swansong for a band as huge as The Beatles. And not only this is a <em>true</em>swansong</em>, but it's also one of the most impressive, accomplished and profound Beatles albums, and in fact, my very favourite.</p>

<p>Well, there is a relatively small amount of "songs" here - that is, isolated, complete songs which are meant to be taken as single entities. As you might know, about half of these tracks are, in fact, incomplete pieces of music which are woven together into what you can consider a bigger piece - a sixteen minute long suite - or, if you want to be precise, a two-part suite. Of course, McCartney's idea of making a suite was more of a contrivance than a well thought-out plan. Some of those bits dated back to the 1968 sessions, and since it was very unlikely that those pieces would ever get to become "complete" songs, he convinced the band to turn them into that. It works, indeed. So much, that I can't find a single flaw in it. I mean it! But I'd be foolish if I said the suite is <em>the</em> big thing of the album. The suite is really just <em>one</em> factor that makes the album great. But you gotta give it special credit for being the very <em>end</em> of the Beatles' carreer, and I think it's unlikely they could have come up with a more spontaneous, natural and clever idea than that. The most I could think of is a ten-minute magnum opus to put 'Hey Jude'to shame, and they'd probably have succeeded at that. But this, in my opinion, was a better idea.</p>

<p>For starters, the suite is pretty well-designed, considering it's a "contrivance". 'You Never Give Me Your Money' is pretty much a complete song, but here, it works essentially as the gateway for the piece as a whole. And it <em>does</em> sound like it was put together with separate bits of music (the piano intro, the rockier verses, the chorus and the fade-out coda), and each part is only featured once in the song. That's probably not gratuitous - parts of the song are recapitulated in 'Carry That Weight', right before the grand conclusion. Did I mention it's a great song? It is. Wacky,almost cartoony, and just great. After that, the pretty, dreamy ballad 'Sun King' makes the "bridge" for the poppier pieces (oh, those verses in Spanish/Italian are just <em>funny</em> - it's not easy to string together random words and make it so great) - that is, the goofy 'Mean Mr. Mustard', the rocking 'Polythene Pam' and Paul's groovy 'She Came In Through The Bathroom Window'. The first two of those, in fact, are pretty much verses without a chorus, while the latter is the most "accomplished". This is where the first part of the suite ends, and the second part pretty much razes everything to the ground. It's hard to think that 'Golden Slumbers' and 'Carry That Weight' weren't born together, but they're pieces without much going on in isolation, but they complete each other with perfection and pure beauty. And 'The End' raises up to end the album on a rockier note - in fact, the song features the <em>only</em> drum solo on a Beatles album, which is countered by a "collaborative" guitar solo by Paul, George and John, taking turns. And the whole thing ends in a miraculously "spiritual" note, as if the band was finally "leaving life to enter history", to paraphrase that Brazilian dictactor who shot himself in the head.</p>

<p>It's inevitable that the "suite" went in along with the "art rock" movement, though it's hard to think that the Beatles had a solid artistic vision with it. I mean, music doesn't always need to "be" artistic, and that doesn't diminish its value. Fact is, if the suite were "pre-designed", it's possible that it would end up way weaker. Many times, the "accidents" end up yelding the best results, if only because of the spontaneity. See: the record even started the tradition of "secret tracks" tacked on at the end, and that <em>also</em> was an accident. The twenty second long 'Her Magesty' was actually meant to be the link between 'Mran Mr. Mustard' and 'Polythene Pam', but Paul asked the engineer to remove it. He stuck the tape at the end of the master reel, and by accident, it ended up on the first pressings, and the band liked the result. Of course it, in theory, ruins the proper grandiose end to the album, but in practice, it probably enhances the effect, with its fright-inducing, out-of-nowhere introductory chord. It's like, after leaving, Paul comes back in a horribly awkward manner, as in a "oops, forgot one little thing", plays his song and runs off as if he had never been there. Amazing how you can write almost an entire paragraph about a 22 second long tune which wasn't even listed in the album's sleeve, eh? I guess I can work on RollingStone, now?</p>

<p>And if I can write all that about 'Her Majesty', supposedly I should be able to write much more about the more important songs here, right? Well, I probably won't. I don't want to bore you. And after all, everyone probably knows 'Come Together' and 'Something', the grandiose double A-side. If you don't know, I suppose it's alright, but those songs <em>are</em> all that good. In my opinion, George's 'Something' far outshines Lennon's song. Not that 'Come Together' doesn't have its merit, with its piercing, subtle bitterness and awesome, jazzy groove. The main instrumental riff alone is worth gold - I mean the bass line countered by Ringo's fast percussion, of course. It's still an iconic and highly memorable song. 'Something' is sublime, though, written and delivered with delicacy and almost perfection. This is easily one of my favourite love songs ever, up there with Nick Drake's 'Nothern Sky', the Beach Boys' 'God Only Knows' and [insert a humourous namecheck of an obviously, gruesomely anti-romantic song here]. George's other song here, 'Here Comes The Sun', is more upbeat and openly joyous, though less deep, in my opinion. Still, another well deserved classic, with an uplifting melody and great, tricky arrangements, featuring a Moog synthesizer quite prominently. The Moog also appears on John's beautiful, choral 'Because', backing up those three-part harmonies and harpsichord, and also on Paul's 'Maxwell Silver Hammer', which is a sort of wicked crossover between the band's "childish" efforts and their darker lyrical thematics. The result is pretty exciting, though it's not a "stand out" in the album. 'Because' isn't something I'd call a "stand out", either, though it's gorgeous, and pretty unique in the Beatles catalogue (I mean, those harmonies). It's just that most of the album is just too brilliant, you see. The only other song that wouldn't be a "stand out" is Ringo's 'Octopus' Garden', though it <em>is</em> the best Ringo song the Beatles ever recorded - and I don't mean that as a "small feat" - I really like that song. It's way more genuine and uplifting than a lot of stuff Paul did.</p>

<p>As for the others, 'Oh! Darling' is pretty much Paul pulling off a John Lennon, tearing his soul apart in a mighty, almost traditional 50's doo wop ballad sort of thing - and by "traditional", I mean intentionally traditional. 'I Want You (She's So Heavy)' is <em>anything</em> but traditional, though, with John crossing over a smooth, groovy performance on the verses - incorporating sudden ups-and-downs, of course - with a demonic, slow, pounding riff from Hell. And I mean <em>from Hell</em>, really; this is unlike anything they did up to that point, especially at the end, when the riff keeps on repeating forever, with a river of white noise slowly rising and washing over it. The effect achieved is unexplainable, and the abrupt cut-off at the end makes one of the best ways to close an album side ever. You know, nowadays, cutting off a song before it "properly" ends is quite commonplace, but back then, ending side A like that must have caused quite an impression. Traumatic, I'd say. Just remember that you had to actually reach out for the record and manually flip it over so it would go on. How easy it would have been to do that after having the living daylights scared out of you by a song that didn't even actually end? I have said I'm not one that goes around raving over the "innovations" that the Beatles made, but <em>that</em> song gets all possible merits from me.</p>

<p><strong>Abbey Road</strong> was already a favourite of mine even before I seriously dug into the Beatles' albums, and after doing so, it's an even stronger favourite of mine. It's the only Beatles album that, to me, feels absolutely complete, without any single detail that could be possibly improved upon. The "non-highlight" songs, in fact, improve the album much more than an actual "highlight" song could, I believe. If there's anything bad about it, it's, well, the fact that it's the end of the Beatles, and the fantasies of "how would the Beatles sound if they kept going down this road". But those don't detract from the music, which is brilliant. This one is high in my book.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>15/15</strong></big> - To me, the Beatles don't get better than this.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>15/15</strong></big> - If only because it's such a rollercoaster of radically opposite moods coming one after another.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Not really innovative, but certainly creative. They did it all well, even when they didn't know what they were doing.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Don't need to say anything here, I suppose.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Nothing in the Beatles catalogue comes even remotely close to this, in terms of seamlessness and all.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/15.png" alt="15" />
</p>

<p><em>Reader comments:</em></p>

<div class="commentsHeader">
      <strong><a href="mailto:awoehrel@netcarrier.com">Andrew Woehrel</a> (July 18, 2004):</strong>
</div>

<div class="comments">
<p>Mike Bryant totally underrates the influence and importance of Come Together. Come Together may very well be the first Indie Rock song that wasn't done by some weirdo like Captain Beefheart. (Not that John Lennon is Mr. Normal himself.) How so? It's not obscure or anything, it's one of the most popular songs of all time. Well, it's repetitive, paranoid, the lyrics are more like isolated nonsensical snippets than actual easy-to-understand phrases, and it's ironic. The Beatles were involved in the hippie movement, but the song is cynical and when John half-heartedly sings the chorus, with more of a venomous delivery than a joyous one, doesn't it seem like he's mocking the Hippie movement?<br />
So wait, repetitive, funky, paranoid, weird lyrics, ironic. WHO DOES THAT SOUND LIKE?</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>THAT'S RIGHT! WAYNE NEWTON!</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>No wait, Talking Heads! YEAH! I bet you never noticed that. Anyway, here's my <strong>Abbey Road</strong> review. I'm not going to do my old practice of listening to the album as I review it, because my old reviews suck, and I'm busy listening to Modest Mouse's <strong>The Moon and Antarctica</strong> (that right there was the obligatory indie faggot namedrop.)</p>
 
<p><strong>Abbey Road</strong>-1969-Capitol Records<br />
Best Song-Any of John's contributions. I'll just say 'Come Together' because I typed so damn much about it up there.</p>
<ol>
<li><span class="good">Come Together ++</span></li>
<li><span class="good">Something ++</span></li>
<li>Maxwell's Silver Hammer</li>
<li>Oh Darling <span class="good">+</span></li>
<li>Octopus's Garden <span class="good">+</span></li>
<li><span class="good">I Want You (She's So Heavy)++</span></li>
<li><span class="good">Here Comes The Sun ++</span></li>
<li>Because</li>
<li>You Never Give Me Your Money <span class="good">+</span></li>
<li>Sun King</li>
<li>Mean Mr. Mustard</li>
<li>Polythene Pam</li>
<li>She Came In Through the Bathroom Window</li>
<li>Golden Slumbers</li>
<li>Carry That Weight</li>
<li>The End <span class="good">+</span><br />
(The Suite as a Whole) <span class="good">++</span></li>
<li><span class="good">Her Majesty ++</span></li>
</ol>
 
<p>Check up there to see my lengthy analysis of Come On Paul McCartney's Face (Check out the subtle Brad Holmes reference there) and then come (together) back down here. Okay, Something is a beautiful song. We all know that. Harrison's best right? Yeah. I agree. George is my second favorite Beatle. Anyway, Maxwell's Silver Hammer has no reason to get a "-" but it has no reason to get a "+" either. <br />
I like Paul's screaming in Oh, Darling. I really don't get the big deal about Octopus's Garden. It's like Yellow Submarine with a cool riff. but it's a cool riff nonetheless, so it gets a +. Do I need to talk about I Want You? NO I DONT BECAUSE IT'S A BETTER SONG THAN YOU COULD WRITE. YEAH, YOU. THE PERSON WHO SPENDS ALL HIS TIME READING FERNIE CANTO'S SITE WHEN THEY COULD BE TRYING TO BEAT THAT DAMN LENNON FELLOW WHO WRITES BETTER SONGS THAN YOU EVEN THOUGH HE'S FUCKING DEAD.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
 
<p>NO, NOT YOU. dumbass.</p>
 
<p>...AND DONT MAKE ME FUCKING MENTION HERE COMES THE SUN! GEORGE IS BETTER THAN YOU TOO.  Is that the catchiest melody ever? I do declare, I think it is. WOO.<br />
Because is meh. I get nothing from it. Nothing bad, though. I like how You Never Give Me Your Money changes, not really to a rocker, but to something much more interesting at least. I don't get Sun King, it's just silly. Mean Mr. Mustard is cool, however, and I enjoy the next few songs the most out of the medley, but it doesn't deserver any better. The three songs that Mike Bryant raves about (Golden Weights, Carry That Slumber, and The End Of The World As We Know It, (and I Feel Fine)) are like, well, yeah, they're better than the rest of the medley, but Paul tries to be beautiful and uplifting, something that he CANNOT DO. So any + that they would recieve is negated by Paul's pretentious overdramaticness. Paul can't be sincere, he's too much of a jackass. and the album ends...confusingly? It's like...woah, that was weird. then BAM! Her Majesty is a funny conclusion, and it creates the idea of "hidden tracks" that are around a lot now. Anyway, it's not emotionally resonant beside's George's stuff, but it's a 10 anyway. Why? because I like it a lot. John and George make some fabulous songs, and Paul's one big suite rules. Good stuff abound. Why not a 10, I ask? it's influential, catchy, fun, mature, and George's stuff is pretty enough to give it some beauty. 10/10</p>
</div>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me now</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="be">Let It Be (1970)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Let It Be</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Two Of Us <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Dig A Pony</li>
  <li>Across The Universe <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>I Me Mine</li>
  <li>Dig It</li>
  <li><span class="good">Let It Be ++</span></li>
  <li>Maggie Mae</li>
  <li>I've Got A Feeling <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>One After 909</li>
  <li>The Long And Winding Road <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>For You Blue <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Get Back <span class="good">+</span></li>
</ol>

<p>The "lost" album. While it's true that this was released after <strong>Abbey Road</strong>, you can't consider this a swansong, since these recordings predate it. And it's even hard to imagine it as a "Beatles album", since it's pretty sketchy, incomplete and retouched by the hands of Phil Spector, who took pretty big liberties to put the songs in proper finished states, and maybe to satisfy his own artistic visions, of course. The classic examples are 'I Me Mine',which had certain parts repeated to turn it into a "proper" song, and 'The Long And Winding Road', with its famous orchestral overdubs on what was supposed to be a plain piano ballad. Several tracks, though, are live takes, taken both from studio sessions and from the performance on the Apple Records building rooftop (in which they were aided by keyboardist Billy Preston).</p>

<p>Overall, though, the album <em>is</em> sketchy, and feels like a collection of things the label had on the shelves and that they wanted to throw out somehow. And some songs aren't even very good. Yes, <em>some</em> of them, not "most" or "many". But only a few songs truly stand out. For example, the classic ballad 'Let It Be' is gorgeous, with a beautifully written melody, and the somewhat excessive production of Phil Spector doesn't even manage to harm its delicacy. Likewise, John's 'Across The Universe' is also retouched, and this version evades all the "sabotages" that John accused Paul of doing on the single version. The version is beautiful, and the song itself is wonderful, dreamy without being too excessively or obviously "spaced out", religious or trippy - yep, <em>considering</em> the mantra in the chorus. The song is grandiose, either way. There are other good songs here, yes. I'm not a big fan of 'Get Back' as some other people seem to be. It's fine, but its sense of humour sounds a bit weary. As for the much maligned version of 'The Long And Winding Road', yes, I think the over-the-top orchestra and choir make the thing a bit corny, but the song is still fine and beautiful, anyway. It's just a bit spoiled.</p>

<p>The live tracks have a quite rough sound, as is to be expected. It works, in its own way, to give the album a raw, unpolished, spontaneous sound. 'Two Of Us', for example, benefits a lot from that, coming off as a nice, cosy, pleasant acoustic tune. It's simple, but not at all simplistic. Other good cuts include the hard rocking 'I've Got A Feeling', which doesn't have a really remarkable musical content - at least until John incorporates a completely different song into it, and both are performed simultaneously. The raving blues of 'Dig A Pony' and the country rock of 'One After 909'are nothing bad, but nothing essential, either; same thing goes for the short snippet of 'Maggie Mae' and the fragment of a long jam called 'Dig It'. I suppose those songs were intended to give the album the aura of a live performance, what with the bits of dialogue and jokes left between the tracks (and sometimes tacked on, as in 'For You Blue'). The problem is that the aura isn't well conserved through the album, what with the studio tracks "interrupting"them, and sometimes, it feels a wee bit forced. But it's a good effort, given the meticulousity of the previous albums and all. It could have been better, maybe, if they had worked on the previous drafts of the album, but I'm just guessing.</p>

<p>Fact is, the album is worth having, for anyone who likes the Beatles more than a bit. You can find great versions of 'Let It Be', 'Across The Universe', 'The Long And Winding Road' and 'Get Back' on their singles compilations, but there's more than that in this album. For example, George's 'For You Blue' is a very, very "standard" Blues tune, but given a delightful performance by the four of them, with heavily plucked acoustic guitar and John's slide. 'I Me Mine' isn't very remarkable, but I wouldn't throw it away,I guess. Honestly, I don't listen to this album very much, but it's still a good one and worth getting. There's the alternative, that atrociously titled <strong>Let It Be... Naked</strong> thing, but this is the original, and ain't all that bad. Stick with it and don't miss out 'Two Of Us'.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>12/15</strong></big> - It's fun, no doubt about it. Just not all that much.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - This might be a bit harsh. After all, it <em>does</em> have a nice feel.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Pretty standard, not a lot of new stuff.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Standard, but definitely good.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - Hmm, well, count this as lack of generosity.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/11.png" alt="11" />
</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>. Really.</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="masters1">Past Masters, Vol 1 (1988)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>She Loves You</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Love Me Do <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>From Me To You <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Thank You Girl</li>
  <li><span class="good">She Loves You ++</span></li>
  <li>I'll Get You</li>
  <li>I Want To Hold Your Hand <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>This Boy <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand</li>
  <li>Sie Liebt Dich</li>
  <li>Long Tall Sally <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>I Call Your Name</li>
  <li>Slow Down</li>
  <li>Matchbox</li>
  <li>I Feel Fine <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>She's A Woman</li>
  <li>Bad Boy</li>
  <li>Yes It Is</li>
  <li>I'm Down <span class="good">+</span></li>
</ol>

<p>There have been countless Beatles compilations through the years, no doubt about it. The most successful one was probably <strong>1</strong>, which gathered 27 number one A-sides, managing to focus on their most readily accessible and friendly hits, evading the more "experimental" stuff. And there was the <strong>Anthology</strong> series, gathering 6 CDs full of "asides", unreleased tracks, work-on-progress takes and so on. But the most <em>essential</em> compilation ever is probably the two-volume <strong>Past Masters</strong>, which gathers <em>all</em> the band's singles, without a single overlap with the albums. That is, even if you already have all the albums, you <em>still</em>need these two LPs to truly own the "meat" of the Beatles' legacy.</p>

<p>Whether it's worth getting, well... Serious Beatles devotees need this as much as they need <strong>Revolver</strong>. For the more casual listeners, <strong>1</strong> will do. After all, along with the famous A-sides, the compilation includes their respective B-sides, as well as a few more obscure releases - in this case, the <em>German</em> version of their two biggest hits at that time, and the <strong>Long Tall Sally</strong> EP. All in all, there's quite a bunch of stuff in here, from the most "pop" oriented phase of the Beatles - that is, from 'Love Me Do' up until the 'I Feel Fine'/'She's A Woman' single. And I'll be honest, the biggest reason why I keep this record is my completist spirit. A large part of this record isn't really very interesting, and kind of blends together into a poppy mass of something else. Yes, some tracks stand out radically, but they form the smallest part of the record.</p>

<p>Say, 'Love Me Do' might sound like overlap to you, but what you find in this record is a different version from what's on <strong>Please Please Me</strong>. That vesion had Andy White on the drums and Ringo on the tambourine, and <em>this</em> is the earlier, original version, with Ringo on the drums. The differences are subtle but noticeable, and it's included here mostly for completeness' sakes, anyway, and maybe because the record needed a proper opening. Oh, well, it's still the classic song. Following that, you have three singles (both the A and the B sides) in chronological order, and the A sides are all great, as you should know. The best of those is 'She Loves You', in my opinion, with a speedy beat, hooks around every corner and a great arrangement all around. Both 'From Me To You' and 'I Want To Hold Your Hand' are great as well, just inferior for their own reasons; the former too light and inoffensive, and the latter too sugary (interesting to note that this track was recorded <em>specifically</em> to be a hit in the US, and so it was), but the melodies and arrangements are remarkable as always. They're always a thrill when they're on, but 'She Loves You' is a definitive stand out for me.</p>

<p>The B-sides, well, if you're familiar with the A-sides, they won't be anything outstanding. Of course they're competently written and performed, but both 'I'll Get You' and 'Thank You Girl' are "more of the same", only less remarkable. It really <em>does</em> sound like they got less effort than their flip sides, but they got <em>some</em> effort, though. 'This Boy' is an exception - a lovely, catchy ballad with very nice harmonies. I guess they didn't really have interest in releasing melancholy ballads like that, but if they had, 'This Boy' would have serious A-side potential, I believe. To close off the sequence of singles, you get the German versions of 'I Want To Hold Your Hand' and 'She Loves You'. It's a curiousity, mostly, since they simply overdubbed the German singing over the original backing tracks (you can hear that the sound quality is way inferior in these versions). It's pretty funny, of course, especially because of the hysterical, side-splitting sense of humour they display when pronouncing "dich" as "dick". Yes, yes, I guess it's more a thing of bitterness, since they definitely <em>didn't</em> want to record those versions.</p>

<p>Side two of the record is considerably less entertaining, in my opinion, mostly because of the <strong>Long Tall Sally</strong> EP. Among these four songs, only 'I Call Your Name' is an original; a nice, but not very memorable John ballad. Of the others, the title track is pretty exciting an entertaining, and with Paul throwing an outrageous, screaming performance. The whole band gives the song some energy, and the result is really good. Side two, though, sags. 'Slow Down' is an unimpressive speedy blues number with nothing to write home about, and 'Matchbox' is an even more traditional bluesy rock 'n' roll ditty, and one of the least entertaining Ringo-sung tracks. 'Bad Boy', which was an US only album release, is in the same vein, pretty dull and predictable. I mean, there's nothing really <em>bad</em>with those covers, but I just don't have too much use for them. The remaining four tracks are definitely better, though only 'I Feel Fine' sounds like it stands competition from the earlier A sides. In terms of music, it's definitely a big evolution, with an actual looping guitar riff, emphatic harmonies, an ultra-jazzy ultra-cool beat by Ringo and experimentation with guitar feedback in the intro. Shame about those icky lyrics, though. It's pretty evident that, by this time, John was losing steam to write syrupy love songs - what with a million "you know's" and "she said so's" thrown in. But the music is a delight, I can't deny that. His other song is the 'Ticket To Ride' B-side, 'Yes It Is', which will cause a clear d&eacute;j&agrave; vu on anyone who heard 'This Boy' previous to it; the rhythm is almost the same, and the three-part harmonies are all there, though this one is far deeper and sadder, and the harmonies are much,much more developed, as well as the chord changes. I'm a bit more fond of the simplicity and catchiness of 'This Boy', though I can't deny 'Yes It Is' must have been an important step in John's songwriting career - shame they only ressurrected the three-part harmonies on 'Because', on their very last album.</p>

<p>As for Paul, he delivers the slightly strange 'She's A Woman', bringing a somewhat ska-ish beat on the drums and the guitar, and some bold vocals. I don't find a whole lot on this song to be awfully fond of, but it's, say, quite charming and interesting. And for the grand finale, there's the rocking 'I'm Down', which sounds like his equivalent to 'Long Tall Sally' - a lot less raunchy, but almost as exciting, and considerably lighter. Overall, the record isn't a bad one to have, but for me, it's necessary mostly due to the need of completion and the A sides. Like I said, there are better alternatives for the casual listeners, but in terms of relevance and importance, this release is pretty much perfect - especially when complemented by the second volume, reviewed below.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Not bad at all. Some songs here are absolute triumphs.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - There's the energy, you know, though not <em>a lot</em> of it.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>13/15</strong></big> - The covers spoil the picture a bit, in this respect, but the originals? Very little to complain about.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>13/15</strong></big> - With a few exceptions aside, this is fresh from beginning to end.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - Not something I'd like to listen to in one sitting every day, to put it mildly.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/11.png" alt="11" />
</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me your comments</a>.</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="masters2">Past Masters, Vol 2 (1988)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Hey Jude</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">Day Tripper ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">We Can Work It Out ++</span></li>
  <li>Paperback Writer <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Rain ++</span></li>
  <li>Lady Madonna</li>
  <li>The Inner Light <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Hey Jude ++</span></li>
  <li>Revolution</li>
  <li>Get Back <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Don't Let Me Down</li>
  <li>The Ballad Of John And Yoko <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Old Brown Shoe <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Across The Universe</li>
  <li>Let It Be <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">You Know My Name (Look Up The Number) ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>Volume two is a far better package, with no covers in sight, and only a couple of tracks that entertain me a little less. Side A of this record is pretty much awesome in all respects, going from the classic "double A-side" 'Day Tripper'/'We Can Work It Out' single up to <em>another</em> classic single, 'Hey Jude'. Side B gathers late period songs that are already in the slower, moodier vein, but there are several greats among them as well. Fact is, side A of this LP captures the band in their very creative peak. And keep in mind that songs like 'Strawberry Fields Forever', 'Penny Lane', 'I Am The Walrus' and 'Hello, Goodbye' are omitted because they are already present on <strong>Magical Mystery Tour</strong>! If you add those songs in, imagine the blast you'd have.</p>

<p>But anyway, some of the finest Beatles songs are here. The pair of opening tracks already set the tone, with the punchy, heavy riff rocking of 'Day Tripper' and the melancholy, harmonium laden balladry of Paul's 'We Can Work It Out'. In my opinion, this is definitely one of their best singles ever - up there with 'Strawberry Fields Forever'/'Penny Lane' and 'Come Together'/'Something'. Hey, ain't this one of the first Beatles ballads to be released as an A side? I'm pretty sure it is, and what a ballad it is. The next single has Paul on a more rock 'n' roll feel, with 'Paperback Writer'. It's a pretty simple composition, really, but the witty lyrics and playful harmonies really make it great. The B-side, though, manages to surpass it. 'Rain' is hazy, cloudy, bold and daring for its time, including an actual mantra-like chorus and vocals played in reverse - the very first time they did that. Pretty much everything contributes to that aura - the guitar lines, the high pitched bass playing, the spacious drumming, and of course, the slightly dragged vocals.</p>

<p>'Rain' is definitely the most experimental track here, and nothing else comes close. After all, it dates from the <strong>Revolver</strong> sessions. The only real surprise here is George's B-side 'The Inner Light', which displays clear influence of Indian music, though the song itself isn't strictly Indian. I can only imagine the shock of someone hearing all those strange, exotic sounds bursting in with a heated rhythm on the flip side of such a friendly, funny, familiar tune as Paul's 'Lady Madonna'. I don't dislike 'Lady Madonna' at all, but I think Paul did better. It's still a great track, deserving to be a single. Paul's other A-side is the universally beloved 'Hey Jude', a magnificent, gorgeous ballad which works in pretty much every level, with its non-overstated arrangement and immortal melody. What's quite striking about it is that it's a very simple song, in terms of composition, stepping away from all the unexpected chord changes and sophisticated melodic twists they are so well known for, and with its four minute long coda, it's kind of like a <em>request</em> for simplicity; either as a reminder that it's the simple things that matter, or that too much trickiness can get on one's nerves, or anything. What matters is that the iconic status this song gained is fully deserved. Its flipside, 'Revolution', also falls in with the idea of simplicity. It is the hard-rocking version of 'Revolution 1', and as I already said, I prefer the laidback, ironic blues rendition in the album. The single version isn't bad, but all the loud guitars, fast pace and up-front vocals make the song all too obvious and blatant to me, and all this "hard rocking" sounds awfully forced.</p>

<p>Side two has a whooping three tracks that appeared before on <strong>Let It Be</strong>, but they are different versions alright: 'Get Back' erases the chatter in the beginning and the cheering at the end, and adds in an extended outro recorded later on; 'Let It Be' is a lighter, non-Spector mix, with a different guitar solo; and 'Across The Universe' is the infamous "Wildlife" version, with a stupid 20-second intro with bird sounds that's, well, stupid. Also, the song is sped-up (while the Spector version was slowed-down - goodness, it's never good enough, is it?), giving it an awfully "wobbly" sound, and the 300-hundred-thousand people choir is replaced by two "Apple Scruffs" whose vocals are, let's say, unreliable. Suffice to say, I like the Spector album better. Of the "new" songs, there's the bluesy, slow, raving 'Don't Let Me Down', which plods on too lazily to truly get my attention. 'The Ballad Of John And Yoko' is far better: a speedy, poppy, Bob Dylan inspired tune which is enjoyable, toe-tappingly catchy all the way through, and George's 'Old Brown Shoe' is just strange, funny and invigorating as hell. The rhythms stomp-stomps on and on, and the performance seems to grow more energetic as it goes.</p>

<p>But if you're up for real oddities, just dig the B-side 'You Know My Name (Look Up The Number)', which is pretty much a solo Lennon/McCartney contribution. The song is pretty much a single line performed in four different ways, but the whole thing is done in a clear comical fashion, and it damn <em>works</em>. This is exactly the kind of sense-of-humour that many people would point out as stereotypically British - Monty Pythonesque non-sequitur weirdness, you know, and for all those unfunny attempts at humour, this really makes up for it. Be it the parodic screaming on the "hard rock" part, or Paul's "Mambo singer" scat-singing and tremoloing, or John's squeaky voice and the uninteligible growling at the end, this is nonsense at its very best, and certainly an odd, but strangely natural ending to the compilation, and in a way, to the Beatles catalog. Anyway, this is another essential collection; in my opinion, far more consistent than volume one, and with better songs. If you get one, you should probably get the other one as well, but this one is more recommended. Get it before it's too late, especially for 'Rain'.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Largely entertaining, in particular the first side.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - A few exceptions aside, this is the <em>Beatles</em>, you know. Not Sigur R&oacute;s.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>15/15</strong></big> - The largest part of this package is stuffed with creative and innovative material.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Um... I've seen some of this before?<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - More consistent than volume one, as I said.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/12.png" alt="12" />
</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me your comments</a>.</p>

<hr />

<p><a href="index.htm">Back to the Reviews Page index</a></p>

<p>
  <a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer"><img
      src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10"
      alt="Valid XHTML 1.0!" height="31" width="88" /></a>
</p>

</body>

</html>